An Abstract Framework for Non-Cooperative Multi-Agent Planning

[EN] In non-cooperative multi-agent planning environments, it is essential to have a system that enables the agents¿ strategic behavior. It is also important to consider all planning phases, i.e., goal allocation, strategic planning, and plan execution, in order to solve a complete problem. Currently, we have no evidence of the existence of any framework that brings together all these phases for non-cooperative multi-agent planning environments. In this work, an exhaustive study is made to identify existing approaches for the different phases as well as frameworks and different applicable techniques in each phase. Thus, an abstract framework that covers all the necessary phases to solve these types of problems is proposed. In addition, we provide a concrete instantiation of the abstract framework using different techniques to promote all the advantages that the framework can offer. A case study is also carried out to show an illustrative example of how to solve a non-cooperative multi-agent planning problem with the presented framework. This work aims to establish a base on which to implement all the necessary phases using the appropriate technologies in each of them and to solve complex problems in different domains of application for non-cooperative multi-agent planning settings.This work was partially funded by MINECO/FEDER RTI2018-095390-B-C31 project of the Spanish government. Jaume Jordan and Vicent Botti are funded by Universitat Politecnica de Valencia (UPV) PAID-06-18 project. Jaume Jordan is also funded by grant APOSTD/2018/010 of Generalitat Valenciana Fondo Social Europeo.Jordán, J.; Bajo, J.; Botti, V.; Julian Inglada, VJ. (2019). An Abstract Framework for Non-Cooperative Multi-Agent Planning. Applied Sciences. 9(23):1-18. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9235180S118923De Weerdt, M., & Clement, B. (2009). Introduction to planning in multiagent systems. Multiagent and Grid Systems, 5(4), 345-355. doi:10.3233/mgs-2009-0133Dunne, P. E., Kraus, S., Manisterski, E., & Wooldridge, M. (2010). Solving coalitional resource games. Artificial Intelligence, 174(1), 20-50. doi:10.1016/j.artint.2009.09.005Torreño, A., Onaindia, E., Komenda, A., & Štolba, M. (2018). Cooperative Multi-Agent Planning. ACM Computing Surveys, 50(6), 1-32. doi:10.1145/3128584Fikes, R. E., & Nilsson, N. J. (1971). Strips: A new approach to the application of theorem proving to problem solving. Artificial Intelligence, 2(3-4), 189-208. doi:10.1016/0004-3702(71)90010-5Hoffmann, J., & Nebel, B. (2001). The FF Planning System: Fast Plan Generation Through Heuristic Search. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 14, 253-302. doi:10.1613/jair.855Dukeman, A., & Adams, J. A. (2017). Hybrid mission planning with coalition formation. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 31(6), 1424-1466. doi:10.1007/s10458-017-9367-7Hadad, M., Kraus, S., Ben-Arroyo Hartman, I., & Rosenfeld, A. (2013). Group planning with time constraints. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 69(3), 243-291. doi:10.1007/s10472-013-9363-9Guo, Y., Pan, Q., Sun, Q., Zhao, C., Wang, D., & Feng, M. (2019). Cooperative Game-based Multi-Agent Path Planning with Obstacle Avoidance*. 2019 IEEE 28th International Symposium on Industrial Electronics (ISIE). doi:10.1109/isie.2019.8781205v. Neumann, J. (1928). Zur Theorie der Gesellschaftsspiele. Mathematische Annalen, 100(1), 295-320. doi:10.1007/bf01448847Mookherjee, D., & Sopher, B. (1994). Learning Behavior in an Experimental Matching Pennies Game. Games and Economic Behavior, 7(1), 62-91. doi:10.1006/game.1994.1037Ochs, J. (1995). Games with Unique, Mixed Strategy Equilibria: An Experimental Study. Games and Economic Behavior, 10(1), 202-217. doi:10.1006/game.1995.1030Applegate, C., Elsaesser, C., & Sanborn, J. (1990). An architecture for adversarial planning. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 20(1), 186-194. doi:10.1109/21.47820Sailer, F., Buro, M., & Lanctot, M. (2007). Adversarial Planning Through Strategy Simulation. 2007 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Games. doi:10.1109/cig.2007.368082Willmott, S., Richardson, J., Bundy, A., & Levine, J. (2001). Applying adversarial planning techniques to Go. Theoretical Computer Science, 252(1-2), 45-82. doi:10.1016/s0304-3975(00)00076-1Nau, D. S., Au, T. C., Ilghami, O., Kuter, U., Murdock, J. W., Wu, D., & Yaman, F. (2003). SHOP2: An HTN Planning System. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 20, 379-404. doi:10.1613/jair.1141Knuth, D. E., & Moore, R. W. (1975). An analysis of alpha-beta pruning. Artificial Intelligence, 6(4), 293-326. doi:10.1016/0004-3702(75)90019-3Vickrey, W. (1961). COUNTERSPECULATION, AUCTIONS, AND COMPETITIVE SEALED TENDERS. The Journal of Finance, 16(1), 8-37. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.1961.tb02789.xClarke, E. H. (1971). Multipart pricing of public goods. Public Choice, 11(1), 17-33. doi:10.1007/bf01726210Groves, T. (1973). Incentives in Teams. Econometrica, 41(4), 617. doi:10.2307/1914085Savaux, J., Vion, J., Piechowiak, S., Mandiau, R., Matsui, T., Hirayama, K., … Silaghi, M. (2016). DisCSPs with Privacy Recast as Planning Problems for Self-Interested Agents. 2016 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence (WI). doi:10.1109/wi.2016.0057Buzing, P., Mors, A. ter, Valk, J., & Witteveen, C. (2006). Coordinating Self-interested Planning Agents. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 12(2), 199-218. doi:10.1007/s10458-005-6104-4Ter Mors, A., & Witteveen, C. (s. f.). Coordinating Non Cooperative Planning Agents: Complexity Results. IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology. doi:10.1109/iat.2005.60Hrnčíř, J., Rovatsos, M., & Jakob, M. (2015). Ridesharing on Timetabled Transport Services: A Multiagent Planning Approach. Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, 19(1), 89-105. doi:10.1080/15472450.2014.941759Galuszka, A., & Swierniak, A. (2009). Planning in Multi-agent Environment Using Strips Representation and Non-cooperative Equilibrium Strategy. Journal of Intelligent and Robotic Systems, 58(3-4), 239-251. doi:10.1007/s10846-009-9364-4Rosenthal, R. W. (1973). A class of games possessing pure-strategy Nash equilibria. International Journal of Game Theory, 2(1), 65-67. doi:10.1007/bf01737559Jordán, J., Torreño, A., de Weerdt, M., & Onaindia, E. (2017). A better-response strategy for self-interested planning agents. Applied Intelligence, 48(4), 1020-1040. doi:10.1007/s10489-017-1046-5Veloso, M., Muñoz-Avila, H., & Bergmann, R. (1996). Case-based planning: selected methods and systems. AI Communications, 9(3), 128-137. doi:10.3233/aic-1996-9305VOORNEVELD, M., BORM, P., VAN MEGEN, F., TIJS, S., & FACCHINI, G. (1999). CONGESTION GAMES AND POTENTIALS RECONSIDERED. International Game Theory Review, 01(03n04), 283-299. doi:10.1142/s0219198999000219Han-Lim Choi, Brunet, L., & How, J. P. (2009). Consensus-Based Decentralized Auctions for Robust Task Allocation. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 25(4), 912-926. doi:10.1109/tro.2009.2022423Monderer, D., & Shapley, L. S. (1996). Potential Games. Games and Economic Behavior, 14(1), 124-143. doi:10.1006/game.1996.0044Friedman, J. W., & Mezzetti, C. (2001). Learning in Games by Random Sampling. Journal of Economic Theory, 98(1), 55-84. doi:10.1006/jeth.2000.2694Aamodt, A., & Plaza, E. (1994). Case-Based Reasoning: Foundational Issues, Methodological Variations, and System Approaches. AI Communications, 7(1), 39-59. doi:10.3233/aic-1994-7104Bertsekas, D. P. (1988). The auction algorithm: A distributed relaxation method for the assignment problem. Annals of Operations Research, 14(1), 105-123. doi:10.1007/bf02186476Bertsekas, D. P., & Castanon, D. A. (1989). The auction algorithm for the transportation problem. Annals of Operations Research, 20(1), 67-96. doi:10.1007/bf0221692

An Ontological-based Knowledge-Representation Formalism for Case-Based Argumentation

The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10796-014-9524-3[EN] In open multi-agent systems, agents can enter or leave the system, interact, form societies, and have dependency relations with each other. In these systems, when agents have to collaborate or coordinate their activities to achieve their objectives, their different interests and preferences can come into conflict. Argumentation is a powerful technique to harmonise these conflicts. However, in many situations the social context of agents determines the way in which agents can argue to reach agreements. In this paper, we advance research in the computational representation of argumentation frameworks by proposing a new ontologicalbased, knowledge-representation formalism for the design of open MAS in which the participating software agents are able to manage and exchange arguments with each other taking into account the agents’ social context. This formalism is the core of a case-based argumentation framework for agent societies. In addition, we present an example of the performance of the formalism in a real domain that manages the requests received by the technicians of a call centre.This work is supported by the Spanish government grants [CONSOLIDER-INGENIO 2010 CSD2007-00022, TIN2011-27652-C03-01, and TIN2012-36586-C03-01] and by the GVA project [PROMETEO II/2013/019].Heras Barberá, SM.; Botti, V.; Julian Inglada, VJ. (2014). An Ontological-based Knowledge-Representation Formalism for Case-Based Argumentation. Information Systems Frontiers. 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-014-9524-3S120Amgoud, L. (2005). An argumentation-based model for reasoning about coalition structures. In 2nd international workshop on argumentation in multi-agent systems, argmas-05(pp. 1–12). Springer.Amgoud, L., Dimopolous, Y., Moraitis, P. (2007). A unified and general framework for argumentation-based negotiation. In 6th international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems, AAMAS-07. IFAAMAS.Atkinson, K., & Bench-Capon, T. (2008). Abstract argumentation scheme frameworks. In Proceedings of the 13th international conference on artificial intelligence: methodology, systems and applications, AIMSA-08, lecture notes in artificial intelligence (Vol. 5253, pp. 220–234). Springer.Aulinas, M., Tolchinsky, P., Turon, C., Poch, M., Cortés, U. (2012). Argumentation-based framework for industrial wastewater discharges management. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 25(2), 317–325.Bench-Capon, T., & Atkinson, K. (2009). Argumentation in artificial intelligence, chap. abstract argumentation and values (pp. 45–64). Springer.Bench-Capon, T., & Sartor, G. (2003). A model of legal reasoning with cases incorporating theories and values. Artificial Intelligence, 150(1-2), 97–143.Bulling, N., Dix, J., Chesñevar, C.I. (2008). Modelling coalitions: ATL + argumentation. In Proceedings of the 7th international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems, AAMAS-08 (Vol. 2, pp. 681–688). ACM Press.Chesñevar, C., McGinnis, J., Modgil, S., Rahwan, I., Reed, C., Simari, G., South, M., Vreeswijk, G., Willmott, S. (2006). Towards an argument interchange format. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 21(4), 293–316.Diaz-Agudo, B., & Gonzalez-Calero, P.A. (2007). Ontologies: A handbook of principles, concepts and applications in information systems, integrated series in information systems, chap. an ontological approach to develop knowledge intensive cbr systems (Vol. 14, pp. 173–214). Springer.Dung, P.M. (1995). On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming, and N -person games. Artificial Intelligence, 77, 321–357.Ferber, J., Gutknecht, O., Michel, F. (2004). From agents to organizations: An organizational view of multi-agent systems. In Agent-oriented software engineering VI, LNCS (Vol. 2935, pp. 214–230.) Springer-Verlag.Hadidi, N., Dimopolous, Y., Moraitis, P. (2010). Argumentative alternating offers. In 9th international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems, AAMAS-10 (pp. 441–448). IFAAMAS.Heras, S., Atkinson, K., Botti, V., Grasso, F., Julián, V., McBurney, P. (2010). How argumentation can enhance dialogues in social networks. In Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on computational models of argument, COMMA-10, frontiers in artificial intelligence and applications (Vol. 216, pp. 267–274). IOS Press.Heras, S., Botti, V., Julián, V. (2011). On a computational argumentation framework for agent societies. In Argumentation in multi-agent systems (pp. 123–140). Springer.Heras, S., Botti, V., Julián, V. (2012). Argument-based agreements in agent societies. Neurocomputing, 75(1), 156–162.Heras, S., Jordán, J., Botti, V., Julián, V. (2013). Argue to agree: A case-based argumentation approach. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 54(1), 82–108.Jordán, J., Heras, S., Julián, V. (2011). A customer support application using argumentation in multi-agent systems. In 14th international conference on information fusion (FUSION-11) (pp. 772– 778).Karunatillake, N.C. (2006). Argumentation-based negotiation in a social context. Ph.D. thesis, School of Electronics and Computer Science, University of Southampton, UK.Karunatillake, N.C., Jennings, N.R., Rahwan, I., McBurney, P. (2009). Dialogue games that agents play within a society. Artificial Intelligence, 173(9-10), 935–981.Kraus, S., Sycara, K., Evenchik, A. (1998). Reaching agreements through argumentation: a logical model and implementation. Artificial Intelligence, 104, 1–69.López de Mántaras, R., McSherry, D., Bridge, D., Leake, D., Smyth, B., Craw, S., Faltings, B., Maher, M.L., Cox, M., Forbus, K., Keane, M., Watson, I. (2006). Retrieval, reuse, revision, and retention in CBR. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 20(3), 215–240.Luck, M., & McBurney, P. (2008). Computing as interaction: Agent and agreement technologies. In IEEE international conference on distributed human-machine systems. IEEE Press.Oliva, E., McBurney, P., Omicini, A. (2008). Co-argumentation artifact for agent societies. In 5th international workshop on argumentation in multi-agent systems, Argmas-08 (pp. 31–46). Springer.Ontañón, S., & Plaza, E. (2007). Learning and joint deliberation through argumentation in multi-agent systems. In 7th international conference on agents and multi-agent systems, AAMAS-07. ACM Press.Ontañón, S., & Plaza, E. (2009). Argumentation-based information exchange in prediction markets. In Argumentation in multi-agent systems, LNAI (vol. 5384, pp. 181–196). Springer.Parsons, S., Sierra, C., Jennings, N.R. (1998). Agents that reason and negotiate by arguing. Journal of Logic and Computation, 8(3), 261–292.Prakken, H. (2010). An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Argument and Computation, 1, 93–124.Prakken, H., Reed, C., Walton, D. (2005). Dialogues about the burden of proof. In Proceedings of the 10th international conference on artificial intelligence and law, ICAIL-05 (pp. 115–124). ACM Press.Sierra, C., Botti, V., Ossowski, S. (2011). Agreement computing. KI - Künstliche Intelligenz 10.1007/s13218-010-0070-y .Soh, L.K., & Tsatsoulis, C. (2005). A real-time negotiation model and a multi-agent sensor network implementation. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 11(3), 215–271.Walton, D., Reed, C., Macagno, F. (2008). Argumentation schemes. Cambridge University Press.Wardeh, M., Bench-Capon, T., Coenen, F.P. (2008). PISA - pooling information from several agents: Multiplayer argumentation from experience. In Proceedings of the 28th SGAI international conference on artificial intelligence, AI-2008 (pp. 133–146). Springer.Wardeh, M., Bench-Capon, T., Coenen, F.P. (2009). PADUA: A protocol for argumentation dialogue using association rules. AI and Law, 17(3), 183–215.Wardeh, M., Coenen, F., Bench-Capon, T. (2010). Arguing in groups. In 3rd international conference on computational models of argument, COMMA-10 (pp. 475–486). IOS Press.Willmott, S., Vreeswijk, G., Chesñevar, C., South, M., McGinnis, J., Modgil, S., Rahwan, I., Reed, C., Simari, G. (2006). Towards an argument interchange format for multi-agent systems. In 3rd international workshop on argumentation in multi-agent systems, ArgMAS-06 (pp. 17–34). Springer.Wyner, A., & Schneider, J. (2012). Arguing from a point of view. In Proceedings of the first international conference on agreement technologies

Reaching unanimous agreements within agent-based negotiation teams with linear and monotonic utility functions

[EN] In this article, an agent-based negotiation model for negotiation teams that negotiate a deal with an opponent is presented. Agent-based negotiation teams are groups of agents that join together as a single negotiation party because they share an interest that is related to the negotiation process. The model relies on a trusted mediator that coordinates and helps team members in the decisions that they have to take during the negotiation process: which offer is sent to the opponent, and whether the offers received from the opponent are accepted. The main strength of the proposed negotiation model is the fact that it guarantees unanimity within team decisions since decisions report a utility to team members that is greater than or equal to their aspiration levels at each negotiation round. This work analyzes how unanimous decisions are taken within the team and the robustness of the model against different types of manipulations. An empirical evaluation is also performed to study the impact of the different parameters of the model.This work is supported by TIN2008-04446, PROMETEO/2008/051, TIN2009-13839-C03-01, CSD2007-00022 of the Spanish government, and FPU Grant AP2008-00600 awarded to Victor Sanchez-Anguix. This paper was recommended by Associate Editor X. Wang.Sanchez-Anguix, V.; Julian Inglada, VJ.; Botti, V.; García-Fornes, A. (2012). Reaching unanimous agreements within agent-based negotiation teams with linear and monotonic utility functions. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B: Cybernetics. 42(3):778-792. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMCB.2011.2177658S77879242

A flexible and dynamic mobile robot localization approach

[EN] The main goal of this paper is to provide an approach to solve the problem of localization in mobile robots using multi-agent systems. Usually, the robot localization problem is solved in static environments by the addition of the needed sensors in order to help the robot, but this is not useful in dynamic environments where the robot is moving through different rooms or areas. The novelty of this dynamic scenario is that each room is composed of external devices that can enter or exit the system in a dynamic way and report the position where the robot is. In this way, we propose a multi-agent system using the SPADE multi-agent technology platform to improve the location of mobile robots in dynamic scenarios. To do this, we are going to use some of the advantages offered by the SPADE platform such as presence notification and subscription protocols in order to design a friendship network between sensors/devices and the mobile robots.This work was supported by the project TIN2015-65515-C4-1-R of the Spanish government.Peñaranda-Cebrián, C.; Palanca Cámara, J.; Julian Inglada, VJ.; Botti, V. (2018). A flexible and dynamic mobile robot localization approach. Logic Journal of IGPL. https://doi.org/10.1093/jigpal/jzy045

An Intelligent Platform for supporting optimized collaborative urban logistics

[EN] Optimized urban logistics is an important issue for rapidly growing cities worldwide. Many criteria can be optimized in order to improve the performance of urban logistics. Economic and time dependent criteria are central but not the only ones; lately, sustainable criteria are becoming key and urgent due to new regulations and environmental concern of governments and the society. In this work we review the state of the art of intelligent developments and techniques that might aid to build smart and optimized urban logistic applications. Moreover, we propose a prototype platform conceived as a supporting and facilitating layer for the growing business of last mile delivery (LMD) companies that operate in cities in an isolated way. Our vision is to provide a cooperative intelligent platform that provides coordination and collaboration services for the LMD companies of urban areas.This research is supported by research project TIN2015-65515-C4-1-R from the Spanish government.Giret Boggino, AS.; Julian Inglada, VJ.; Botti, V. (2019). An Intelligent Platform for supporting optimized collaborative urban logistics. Springer. 3-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27477-1_1S314Alonso-Mora, J., Samaranayake, S., Wallar, A., Frazzoli, E., Rus, D.: On-demand high-capacity ride-sharing via dynamic trip-vehicle assignment. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 114(3), 462–467 (2017)Bianchi, L., Dorigo, M., Gambardella, L.M., Gutjahr, W.J.: A survey on metaheuristics for stochastic combinatorial optimization. Nat. Comput. 8(2), 239–287 (2009)Buning, M., Schonewolf, W.: Freight transport system for urban shipment and delivery. In: 2011 IEEE Forum on Integrated and Sustainable Transportation Systems, FISTS 2011, pp. 136–140 (2011)Gentile, G., Noekel, K.: Modeling Public Transport Passenger Flows in the Era of Intelligent Transport Systems. Springer, Heidelberg (2016)Gonzalez-Feliu, J., Semet, F., Routhier, J.L.: Sustainable Urban Logistics: Concepts, Methods and Information Systems. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Griffis, S.E., Goldsby, T.J., Cooper, M., Closs, D.J.: Aligning logistics performance measures to the information needs of the firm. J. Bus. Logist. 48, 35–56 (2007)Gunasekaran, A., Kobu, B.: Performance measures and metrics in logistics and supply chain management: a review of recent literature (1995–2004) for research and applications. Int. J. Prod. Res. 45, 2819–2840 (2007)Macharis, C., Melo, S.: City Distribution and Urban Freight Transport: Multiple Perspectives. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham (2011)Morana, J., Gonzalez-Feliu, J.: A sustainable urban logistics dashboard from the perspective of a group of operational managers. Manag. Res. Rev. 38(10), 1068–1085 (2015)Neirotti, P., De Marco, A., Cagliano, A.C., Mangano, G., Scorrano, F.: Current trends in smart city initiatives: some stylised facts. Cities 38, 25–36 (2014)Pagell, M., Wu, Z.: Building a more complete theory of sustainable supply chain management using case studies of 10 exemplars. J. Supply Chain Manag. 45, 37–56 (2009)Chatterjee, R.: Optimizing last mile delivery using public transport with multiagent based control. Master Thesis, pp. 1–59 (2016)Market Reports. Global last mile delivery market size, status and forecast 2019–2025. The Market Reports. Report Code 1362721, pp. 1–114 (2019)Sabater, J., Sierra, C.: Review on computational trust and reputation models. Artif. Intell. Rev. 24(1), 33–60 (2005)Skiver, R.L., Godfrey, M.: Crowdserving: A last mile delivery method for brick-and-mortar retailers. Global J. Bus. Res. 11(2), 67–77 (2017)Xiao, Z., Wang, J.J., Lenzer, J., Sun, Y.: Understanding the diversity of final delivery solutions for online retailing: a case of shenzhen, china. In: Transportation Research Procedia, World Conference on Transport Research - WCTR 2016 Shanghai, 10-15 July 2016, vol. 25, pp. 985–998 (2017

A Crowdsourcing Approach for Sustainable Last Mile Delivery

[EN] Sustainable transportation is one of the major concerns in cities. This concern involves all type of movements motivated by different goals (mobility of citizens, transportation of goods and parcels, etc.). The main goal of this work is to provide an intelligent approach for Sustainable Last Mile Delivery, by reducing (or even deleting) the need of dedicated logistic moves (by cars, and/or trucks). The method attempts to reduce the number of movements originated by the parcels delivery by taking advantage of the citizens' movements. In this way our proposal follows a crowdsourcing approach, in which the citizens that moves in the city, because of their own needs, become temporal deliverers. The technology behind our approach relays on Multi-agent System techniques and complex network-based algorithms for optimizing sustainable delivery routes. These artificial intelligent approaches help to reduce the complexity of the scenario providing an efficient way to integrate the citizens' routes that can be executed using the different transportation means and networks available in the city (public system, private transportation, eco-vehicles sharing systems, etc.). A complex network-based algorithm is used for computing and proposing an optimized Sustainable Last Mile Delivery route to the crowd. Moreover, the executed tests show the feasibility of the proposed solution, together with a high reduction of the CO2 emission coming from the delivery trucks that, in the case studies, are no longer needed for delivery.This research was carried out as a part of the SURF project under the grant TIN2015-65515- C4-1-R by the Spanish government.Giret Boggino, AS.; Carrascosa Casamayor, C.; Julian Inglada, VJ.; Rebollo Pedruelo, M.; Botti, V. (2018). A Crowdsourcing Approach for Sustainable Last Mile Delivery. Sustainability. 10(12). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124563S101

Multi-domain case-based module for customer support

[EN] Technology management centres provide technological and customer support services for private or public organisations. Commonly, these centres offer support by using a helpdesk software that facilitates the work of their operators. In this paper, a CBR module that acts as a solution recommender for customer support environments is presented. The CBR module is flexible and multi-domain, in order to be easily integrable with any existing helpdesk software in the company. (c) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.This work was partially supported by CONSOLIDER-INGENIO 2010 under grant CSD2007-00022 and by the Spanish government and FEDER funds under PROFIT FIT-340001-2004-11, CICYT TIN2005-03395 and TIN2006-14630-C0301 projectsHeras Barberá, SM.; Garcia Pardo Gimenez De Los Galanes, JA.; Ramos-Garijo Font De Mora, R.; Palomares Chust, A.; Botti, V.; Rebollo Pedruelo, M.; Julian Inglada, VJ. (2009). Multi-domain case-based module for customer support. Expert Systems with Applications. 36(3):6866-6873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.08.003S6866687336

Genetic Anticipation Is Associated with Telomere Shortening in Hereditary Breast Cancer

There is increasing evidence suggesting that short telomeres and subsequent genomic instability contribute to malignant transformation. Telomere shortening has been described as a mechanism to explain genetic anticipation in dyskeratosis congenita and Li-Fraumeni syndrome. Since genetic anticipation has been observed in familial breast cancer, we aimed to study telomere length in familial breast cancer patients and hypothesized that genetic defects causing this disease would affect telomere maintenance resulting in shortened telomeres. Here, we first investigated age anticipation in mother-daughter pairs with breast cancer in 623 breast cancer families, classified as BRCA1, BRCA2, and BRCAX. Moreover, we analyzed telomere length in DNA from peripheral blood leukocytes by quantitative PCR in a set of 198 hereditary breast cancer patients, and compared them with 267 control samples and 71 sporadic breast cancer patients. Changes in telomere length in mother-daughter pairs from breast cancer families and controls were also evaluated to address differences through generations. We demonstrated that short telomeres characterize hereditary but not sporadic breast cancer. We have defined a group of BRCAX families with short telomeres, suggesting that telomere maintenance genes might be susceptibility genes for breast cancer. Significantly, we described that progressive telomere shortening is associated with earlier onset of breast cancer in successive generations of affected families. Our results provide evidence that telomere shortening is associated with earlier age of cancer onset in successive generations, suggesting that it might be a mechanism of genetic anticipation in hereditary breast cancer