Self-Organization in Peer-to-Peer Systems

Peer-to-Peer Systems are about community-based cooperations. The peers share responsibilities and benefits by cooperating in a distributed and decentralized environment. To carry out tasks sensibly, however, a more or less rigid order is required for efficiency and reliability reasons. This order can be partially imposed from the outside, for example within so-called "structed" Peer-to-Peer systems. A common approach here is the use of Distributed Hash Tables. Alternatively, Peer-to-Peer systems can be "unstructured" in the sense that an useful order emerges from own internal processes. Unstructured and structured Peer-to-Peer systems rely both on a more or less decentralized overlay management. Self-organization, therefore, is a key to the success of Peer-to-Peer systems in various forms. This presentation gives an overview of the role of self-organization in Peer-to-Peer systems

Epidemic-based self-organization in peer-to-peer systems

Steen, M.R. [Promotor]van Tanenbaum, A.S. [Promotor

Utility-Based Mechanism for Structural Self-Organization in Service-Oriented MAS

Structural relations established among agents influence the performance of decentralized service discovery process in multiagent systems. Moreover, distributed systems should be able to adapt their structural relations to changes in environmental conditions. In this article, we present a service-oriented multiagent systems, where agents initially self-organize their structural relations based on the similarity of their services. During the service discovery process, agents integrate a mechanism that facilitates the self-organization of their structural relations to adapt the structure of the system to the service demand. This mechanism facilitates the task of decentralized service discovery and improves its performance. Each agent has local knowledge about its direct neighbors and the queries received during discovery processes. With this information, an agent is able to analyze its structural relations and decide when it is more appropriate to modify its direct neighbors and select the most suitable acquaintances to replace them. The experimental evaluation shows how this self-organization mechanism improves the overall performance of the service discovery process in the system when the service demand changesThis work is partially supported by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation through grants CSD2007-0022 (CONSOLIDER-INGENIO 2010), TIN2012-36586-C03-01, TIN2012-36586-C03-01, TIN2012-36586-C03-02, PROMETEOII/2013/019, and FPU grant AP-2008-00601 awarded to E. Del Val.Del Val Noguera, E.; Rebollo Pedruelo, M.; Vasirani, M.; Fernández, A. (2014). Utility-Based Mechanism for Structural Self-Organization in Service-Oriented MAS. ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems. 9(3):1-24. https://doi.org/10.1145/2651423S12493Sherief Abdallah and Victor Lesser. 2007. Multiagent reinforcement learning and self-organization in a network of agents. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems. 172--179.Lada A. Adamic and Bernardo A. Huberman. 2002. Zipf’s law and the Internet. Glottometrics 3, 143--150.Muntasir Al-Asfoor, Brendan Neville, and Maria Fasli. 2012. Heuristic resource search in a self-organised distributed multi agent system. In Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Self-Organizing Systems. 84--89.Mathieu Aquin, Salman Elahi, and Enrico Motta. 2010. Personal monitoring of Web information exchange: Towards Web lifelogging. In Proceedings of the Web Science Conference.Ulrich Basters and Matthias Klusch. 2006. RS2D: Fast adaptive search for semantic Web services in unstructured p2p networks. In Proceedings of the International Semantic Web Conference. 87--100.Umesh Bellur and Roshan Kulkarni. 2007. Improved matchmaking algorithm for semantic Web services based on bipartite graph matching. In Proceedings of the International Semantic Web Conference. 86--93.Devis Bianchini, Valeria De Antonellis, and Michele Melchiori. 2009. Service-based semantic search in p2p systems. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Web Services. 7--16.Bartosz Biskupski, Jim Dowling, and Jan Sacha. 2007. Properties and mechanisms of self-organizing MANET and P2P systems. ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems 2, 1, 1--34.Alberto Blanc, Yi-Kai Liu, and Amin Vahdat. 2005. Designing incentives for peer-to-peer routing. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies. 374--385.Michael Bowling and Manuela Veloso. 2002. Multiagent learning using a variable learning rate. Artificial Intelligence 136, 215--250.Frances M. T. Brazier, Jeffrey O. Kephart, H. Van Dyke Parunak, and Michael N. Huhns. 2009. Agents and service-oriented computing for autonomic computing: A research agenda. IEEE Internet Computing 13, 3, 82--87.Tyson Condie, Sepandar D. Kamvar, and Hector Garcia-Molina. 2004. Adaptive peer-to-peer topologies. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing. 53--62.Arturo Crespo and Hector Garcia-Molina. 2002. Routing indices for peer-to-peer systems. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems. 23--32.Elena Del Val, Natalia Criado, Carlos Carrascosa, Vicente Julian, Miguel Rebollo, Estefania Argente, and Vicente Botti. 2010. THOMAS: A service-oriented framework for virtual organizations. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS’10). 1631--1632.Elena Del Val, Miguel Rebollo, and Vicente Botti. 2011. Introducing homophily to improve semantic service search in a self-adaptive system. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems. 1241--1242.Elena Del Val, Miguel Rebollo, and Vicente Botti. 2012a. Enhancing decentralized service discovery in open service-oriented multi-agent systems. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 28, 1, 1--30.Elena Del Val, Miguel Rebollo, and Vicente Botti. 2012b. Promoting cooperation in service-oriented MAS through social plasticity and incentives. Journal of Systems and Software 86, 2, 520--537.Gianni Di Caro, Frederick Ducatelle, and Luca Maria Gambardella. 2005. AntHocNet: An adaptive nature-inspired algorithm for routing in mobile ad hoc networks. European Transactions on Telecommunications 16, 443--455.Ding Ding, Lei Liu, and Hartmut Schmeck. 2010. Service discovery in self-organizing service-oriented environments. In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE Asia-Pacific Services Computing Conference. 717--724.Sergey N. Dorogovtsev and Jose F. F. Mendes. 2003. Evolution of Networks: From Biological Nets to the Internet and WWW. Oxford University Press.Giovanna Di Marzo Serugendo, Marie-Pierre Gleizes, and Anthony Karageorgos. 2011. Self-Organizing Software: From Natural to Artificial Adaptation. Natural Computing Series.Erik Einhorn and Andreas Mitschele-Thiel. 2008. RLTE: Reinforcement learning for traffic-engineering. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Autonomous Infrastructure, Management, and Security. 120--133.Nelson Fernandez, Carlos Maldonado, and Carlos Gershenson. 2014. Information measures of complexity, emergence, self-organization, homeostasis, and autopoiesis. In Guided Self-Organization: Inception. Emergence, Complexity and Computation, Vol. 9. Springer, 19--51. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-53734-9_2Jose Luis Fernandez-Marquez, Josep Lluis Arcos, and Giovanna Di Marzo Serugendo. 2012. A decentralized approach for detecting dynamically changing diffuse event sources in noisy WSN environments. Applied Artificial Intelligence 26, 4, 376--397. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08839514.2012.653659Agostino Forestiero, Carlo Mastroianni, and Michela Meo. 2009. Self-Chord: A bio-inspired algorithm for structured P2P systems. In Proceedings of the 9th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Cluster, Cloud, and Grid Computing. 44--51.Matthew E. Gaston and Marie des Jardins. 2005. Agent-organized networks for multi-agent production and exchange. In Proceedings of the 20th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 77--82.Nathan Griffiths and Michael Luck. 2010. Changing neighbours: Improving tag-based cooperation. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems. 249--256.Peter Haase, Ronny Siebes, and Frank van Harmelen. 2008. Expertise-based peer selection in peer-to-peer networks. Knowledge and Information Systems 15, 1, 75--107.Philip N. Howard, Lee Rainee, and Steve Jones. 2001. Days and nights on the Internet. American Behavioural Scientist, 383--404.Bernardo A. Huberman and Lada A. Adamic. 2000. The nature of markets in the WWW. Quarterly Journal of Electronic Commerce 1, 5--12.Michael N. Huhns et al. 2005. Research directions for service-oriented multiagent systems. IEEE Internet Computing 9, 6, 65--70.Tomoko Itao, Tatsuya Suda, Tetsuya Nakamura, Miyuki Imada, Masato Matsuo, and Tomonori Aoyama. 2001. Jack-in-the-Net: Adaptive networking architecture for service emergence. In Proceedings of the Asian-Pacific Conference on Communications. 9.Emily M. Jin, Michelle Girvan, and Mark E. J. Newman. 2001. Structure of growing social networks. Physical Review E 64, 4, 046132.Sachin Kamboj and Keith S. Decker. 2007. Organizational self-design in semi-dynamic environments. In Proceedings of the 6th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems. 335--337.Rahamatullah Khondoker, S. M. Taslim Arif, Nathan Kerr, and Dennis Schwerdel. 2011. Self-organizing communication services in future network architectures. In Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Self-Organizing Systems.Matthias Klusch, Benedikt Fries, and Katia Sycara. 2009. OWLS-MX: A hybrid Semantic Web service matchmaker for OWL-S services. Web Semantics Science Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 7, 2, 121--133.Dionisis Kontominas, Paraskevi Raftopoulou, Christos Tryfonopoulos, and Euripides G. M. Petrakis. 2013. DS4: A distributed social and semantic search system. Advances in Information Retrieval 7814, 832--836.Ramachandra Kota, Nicholas Gibbins, and Nicholas R. Jennings. 2012. Decentralized approaches for self-adaptation in agent organizations. ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems 7, 1, Article No. 1.Paul Lazarsfeld. 1954. Friendship as a social process: A substantive and methodological analysis. In Freedom and Control in Modern Society. Van Nostrand, New York, NY.Paulo Leito. 2013. Towards self-organized service-oriented multi-agent systems. In Service Orientation in Holonic and Multi Agent Manufacturing and Robotics. Studies in Computational Intelligence, Vol. 472. Springer, 41--56.W. Sabrina Lin, Hong Vikcy Zhao, and K. J. Ray Liu. 2009. Incentive cooperation strategies for peer-to-peer live multimedia streaming social networks. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia 11, 3, 396--412.Sheila A. McIlraith, Tran Cao Son, and Honglei Zeng. 2001. Semantic Web services. IEEE Intelligent Systems 16, 2, 46--53.Miller McPherson, Lynn Smith-Lovin, and James Cook. 2001. Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology 27, 415--444.Vivek Nallur and Rami Bahsoon. 2012. A decentralized self-adaptation mechanism for service-based applications in the cloud. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 99, 591--612.Aris Ouksel, Yair Babad, and Thomas Tesch. 2004. Matchmaking software agents in B2B markets. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. 1--9.Massimo Paolucci, Takahiro Kawamura, Terry R. Payne, and Katia P. Sycara. 2002. Semantic matching of Web services capabilities. In Proceedings of the 1st International Semantic Web Conference. 333--347.Leonid Peshkin and Virginia Savova. 2002. Reinforcement learning for adaptive routing. In Proceedings of the 2002 International Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN’02). 1825--1830.Paraskevi Raftopoulou and Euripides G. M. Petrakis. 2008. iCluster: A self-organizing overlay network for P2P information retrieval. In Proceedings of the 30th European Conference on Advances in Information Retrieval (ECIR’08). 65--76.Sharmila Savarimuthu, Maryam Purvis, Martin Purvis, and Bastin Tony Roy Savarimuthu. 2011. Mechanisms for the self-organization of peer groups in agent societies. In Multi-Agent-Based Simulation XI. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 6532. Springer, 93--107.Giovanna Di Marzo Serugendo, Marie-Pierre Gleizes, and Anthony Karageorgos. 2005. Self-organization in multi-agent systems. Knowledge Engineering Review 20, 2, 165--189.Abdul Khalique Shaikh, Saadat M. Alhashmi, and Rajendran Parthiban. 2012. A semantic impact in decentralized resource discovery mechanism for grid computing environments. In Algorithms and Architectures for Parallel Processing. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7440. Springer, 206--216.Qixiang Sun and Hector Garcia-Molina. 2004. SLIC: A selfish link-based incentive mechanism for unstructured peer-to-peer networks. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS’04). 506--515.Mirko Viroli and Franco Zambonelli. 2010. A biochemical approach to adaptive service ecosystems. Information Sciences 180, 10, 1876--1892. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2009.11.021Li Wang. 2011. SoFA: An expert-driven, self-organization peer-to-peer semantic communities for network resource management. Expert Systems with Applications 38, 1, 94--105.Kevin Werbach. 2000. Syndication—the emerging model for business in the Internet era. Harvard Business Review 78, 3, 84--93, 214.Tom Wolf and Tom Holvoet. 2005. Emergence versus self-organisation: Different concepts but promising when combined. In Engineering Self-Organising Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3464. Springer, 1--15.Haizheng Zhang, W. Bruce Croft, Brian Levine, and Victor Lesser. 2004. A multi-agent approach for peer-to-peer based information retrieval system. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, Vol. 1. 456--463.Ming Zhong. 2006. Popularity-biased random walks for peer-to-peer search under the square-root principle. In Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Systems

Simulating peer-to-peer networks

Peer-to-Peer (P2P) systems are emerging as a new form of distributed computing with a strong emphasis on self-organization, decentralization, and autonomy of the participating nodes. The characteristics of self-organization, autonomy, and decentralization allow for highly adaptive, robust, and scalable networks, making P2P an increasingly interesting way to design distributed systems. Since the deployment of P2P systems involves significant resources, e.g., hundreds of hosts and users, it is often not possible to run realistic tests prior to the rollout of the system. Consequently, simulation is the only realistic approach for testing or predicting the behavior of large P2P networks. However, the majority of the existing simulators tend to provide limited flexibility in simulating the details of the users, application, protocol, and physical network. In this research, the impact of user behavior, protocol, and physical network characteristic on the overall P2P system are being observed. The aim is to investigate the importance of simulating P2P systems in such detail

A Random Structure for Optimum Cache Size Distributed hash table (DHT) Peer-to-Peer design

We propose a new and easily-realizable distributed hash table (DHT) peer-to-peer structure, incorporating a random caching strategy that allows for {\em polylogarithmic search time} while having only a {\em constant cache} size. We also show that a very large class of deterministic caching strategies, which covers almost all previously proposed DHT systems, can not achieve polylog search time with constant cache size. In general, the new scheme is the first known DHT structure with the following highly-desired properties: (a) Random caching strategy with constant cache size; (b) Average search time of $O(log^{2}(N))$; (c) Guaranteed search time of $O(log^{3}(N))$; (d) Truly local cache dynamics with constant overhead for node deletions and additions; (e) Self-organization from any initial network state towards the desired structure; and (f) Allows a seamless means for various trade-offs, e.g., search speed or anonymity at the expense of larger cache size.Comment: 13 pages, 2 figures, preprint versio

A Social Network-Based Peer-To-Peer Model For Resource Discovery

Peer-to-Peer (P2P) systems are distributed systems consisting of interconnected nodes which provide scalability, fault tolerance, decentralized coordination, self-organization, anonymity, distributed resources and services sharing, lower cost of ownership and better support for creating ad hoc networks. Data sharing, a subset of resource sharing, is one of the attractive topic in P2P systems. Because of autonomy of the nodes, decentralized coordination and volatility of network caused by the autonomy, data sharing is not an easy task in P2P system. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that a node stays in the network for a specific period of time. Hence, the answers to a particular query may be retrieved from different nodes every time. Moreover, the lack of centralized coordinators makes this process harder. These problems in P2P systems lead to a well known problem which is called resource discovery

Self-organizing particle systems

This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication in Advances in Complex Systems following peer review. The version of record, Malte Harder and Daniel Polani, ‘Self-organizing particle systems’, Advs. Complex Syst. 16, 1250089, published October 22, 2012, is available online via doi: https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219525912500890 Published by World Scientific Publishing.The self-organization of cells into a living organism is a very intricate process. Under the surface of orchestrating regulatory networks there are physical processes which make the information processing possible, that is required to organize such a multitude of individual entities. We use a quantitative information theoretic approach to assess self-organization of a collective system. In particular, we consider an interacting particle system, that roughly mimics biological cells by exhibiting differential adhesion behavior. Employing techniques related to shape analysis, we show that these systems in most cases exhibit self-organization. Moreover, we consider spatial constraints of interactions, and additionaly show that particle systems can self-organize without the emergence of pattern-like structures. However, we will see that regular pattern-like structures help to overcome limitations of self-organization that are imposed by the spatial structure of interactions.Peer reviewe

Structured Peer-to-Peer Overlay Deployment on MANET: A Survey

There are many common characteristics between Peer-to-Peer (P2P) overlay networks and Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (MANET). Self-organization, decentralization, dynamicity and changing topology are the most shared features. Furthermore, when used together, the two approaches complement each other. P2P overlays provide data storage/retrieval functionality, and their routing information can complement that of MANET. MANET provides wireless connectivity between clients without depending on any pre-existing infrastructure. The aim of this paper is to survey current P2P over MANET systems. Specifically, this paper focuses on and investigates structured P2P over MANET. Overall, more than thirty distinct approaches have been classified into groups and introduced in tables providing a structured overview of the area. The survey addresses the identified approaches in terms of P2P systems, MANET underlay systems and the performance of the reviewed systems

Mitigating the Dark Side of Agile Teams: Peer Pressure, Leaders’ Control, and the Innovative Output of Self-managing Teams

Increasingly, organizations have been employing self-managing teams to circumvent bureaucratic controls and stimulate innovation. However, this goal is not easily achieved; in many situations, informal controls replace formal controls. This study develops a multi-level perspective of control. We explicitly analyze control mechanisms at different levels of the organization and how they affect innovative team output. We theorize and empirically investigate a potential downside of horizontal social control mechanisms at the team level (i.e., peer pressure) affecting self-managing teams’ innovative outcomes. We also discuss managerial control mechanisms at the organizational level (i.e., interactive and diagnostic management control systems) that may help to mitigate such negative effects. We theorize how they may influence the innovative output of self-managing teams, both directly and interactively. We chose a multi-level, multi-source setting for our study and ran three parallel surveys with employees in a Fortune 500 firm. 248 team members, 126 internal team leaders, and 97 organizational leaders enabled us to create a unique database of 97 self-managing software development teams. Our findings confirm that peer pressure is common among established agile teams and that it negatively influences the innovative output of the agile teams. Moreover, our findings show that the magnitude of the effect of peer pressure is contingent on control mechanisms at higher levels within the organization. This enables us to provide new theoretical insights regarding the paradoxical effect of managerial control systems when it comes to flat organizations and autonomous teams. Additionally, we provide practical guidelines for managers who increasingly adopt agile practices but at the same time face issues with regard to innovation