See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/269697792

Genetic Algorithms and Game Theory for Airport Departure Decision Making:
GeDMAN and CoDMAN

Conference Paper  in  Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing · September 2014

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-08618-7_1

CITATIONS READS
5 252

5 authors, including:

Deborah Ferreira Vitor Filincowsky Ribeiro

The University of Manchester University of Brasília
6 PUBLICATIONS   6 CITATIONS    11 PUBLICATIONS   21 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Flavio De Barros Vidal Li Weigang

University of Brasília University of Brasília
73 PUBLICATIONS   102 CITATIONS    197 PUBLICATIONS   588 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Development of Computational Models applied to Air Transportation View project

Visual Tracking View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Li Weigang on 23 February 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Genetic Algorithms and Game Theory for
Airport Departure Decision Making: GeDMAN
and CoDMAN

Deborah Mendes Ferreira, Lucas Pessoa Rosa, Vitor Filincowsky Ribeiro,

Flávio de Barros Vidal, and Li Weigang

TransLab, Department of Computer Science, University of Brasilia,

C.P. 4466, CEP: 70910-900, Brasilia – DF, Brazil
{deborahmdf,lucaspessoa,filincowsky}@gmail.com,{fbvidal,weigang}@unb.br

Abstract. Departure Management is responsible for creating a depar-

ture sequence of flights and for deciding which aircraft will takeoff firstly
in scenarios of cancellation or delay. In many cases, this activity depends
only on the experience of air traffic controllers who will empirically decide
the departure sequence. This work presents two computational models
to address the departure sequencing problem in airports according to
Collaborative Decision Making. The first model is GeDMAN, a depar-
ture management system that uses Genetic Algorithm. The second one
named as CoDMAN is based on the negotiation among the agents (air-
craft) in a dynamic scenario using Game Theory. Both approaches are
tested with real flight data from Brasilia International Airport. The sim-
ulation results show that the developed systems have the capability to
manage the departure sequence automatically and reduce the total flight
delay efficiently.

Key words: Airport, Collaborative Decision Making, Departure Man-

agement, Game Theory, Genetic Algorithm.

1 Introduction
The flight delay rate at some of the biggest Brazilian airports is usually around
6% and this value can triplicate on days of bad weather [1]. According to Amer-
ican Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the delayed flights produce a loss
of almost 22 billions of dollars each year for the airlines all over the world [2].
When delays occur the aircraft spend a significant amount of time in a queue
waiting for the clearance of the runway for departure. Usually, an aircraft per-
forms the waiting process with the engines turned on. These results in a waste
of fuel and emission of pollutants in the atmosphere, in addition to impact to
the airlines that increase operating costs, to the airports that extend the stay
time of aircraft and employees and to the passengers that lose time and money.
The departure management of aircrafts is the pre-departure process, in which
all the flights are distributed to time slots. This process is also a slot allocation
procedure. The aircraft should be allocate within its time slot for departing.
2 Deborah Ferreira et al.

When a flight is delayed, its slot needs to be relocated to another flight, so the
runway can always be in use.
In Brazil, the departure management is done empirically by air traffic con-
trollers, they must negotiate the slots with the airlines with First-Come First-
Served (FCFS) and other unclear criteria. This is a challenge for the flight con-
trollers that already have to deal with some complex situations.
Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) is a paradigm that attempts to im-
prove the exchange of information among the various stakeholders involved in
airport, such as Air Traffic Control (ATC) agency, airlines and airport managers.
Based on this concept, in this paper, two computational departure management
systems are developed. Both of them are created to support air traffic con-
trollers in the creation and modification of the departure sequence. The first
model named as GeDMAN uses Genetic Program to find the best departure se-
quence. And the second one is defined as CoDMAN uses Game Theory to play a
game between the aircraft to decide the order of departure in the slot allocation
process.
Both systems have the goal of reducing the flight delays and benefit the air-
lines that collaborate with the flight controllers, informing problems and delays
in advance, for example. Some researches financed by NASA, about the cause
of flight delays, have shown that automatized tools for departure sequencing
are beneficial for the flight controllers and for the aircraft operators [3]. Using
real flight data from Brasilia International Airport (BSB), the simulation results
show that the developed systems have the capability to manage the departure
sequence automatically and reduce the total flight delay efficiently.
This paper is structured in the following manner: section 2 presents the two
decision methods: 1) HOTRAN, that is used in Brasilia International Airport
and others Brazilian airports and 2) CDM that has been used in many airports
in Europe and USA. Section 3 presents the modeling and tests with GeDMAN.
Section 4 presents how CoDMAN was modeled and tested. Section 5 exhibits a
comparison between GeDMAN and CoDMAN. And, finally, section 6 concludes
this work with the discussions.

2 Related work about two decision methods: HOTRAN

and CDM
This section presents related work of two methods to determine the departure
sequence of aircraft in airport: Transport Time (HOTRAN) method and Col-
laborative Decision Making (CDM) method.

2.1 Transport Time (HOTRAN) method

In Brasilia International Airport (BSB), the departure time of the flights is

determined according with the method HOTRAN [5] - Transport Time (in Por-
tuguese: Horário de Transporte). The HOTRAN is a document approved and is-
sued by National Civil Aviation Agency (ANAC - Agência Nacional de Aviação
 GeDMAN and CoDMAN 3

Civil) that formalize the concessions for passengers and cargo airlines explo-
ration. It contains the departure and arrival time, number of flights, frequency,
aircraft types and number of seats.
Each flight has its departure and arrival time defined by HOTRAN, however
it is very common that this schedule does not correspond with the real arrival
and departure time. Delays often occur, mainly due to rain and other weather
conditions. When delays occur, if the runway is available, the first aircraft to
make a departure request will be served in First-Come First-Served (FCFS)
manner. Similarly, when a flight is canceled, any other aircraft can make a request
to use the runway in that free slot.
This method has the advantage of being very simple and is easily to imple-
ment, it was one of the first methods used in the aviation history for controlling
the use of the runway. But this simplicity does not always ensure efficiency in
terms of impacting by delays, fuel use, number of passengers and others factors.
This method has many disadvantages, such as it does not allow a planned
optimization of the runway use. The air traffic controller has to keep waiting
for the aircraft request to use the runway, until then, he does not know which
aircraft will be the next to use the runway. In that case, the air traffic controller
has little control over the runway use. Furthermore, long queues can be formed
to use the runway, causing the aircraft to stand still with the engine running,
unnecessarily spending fuel and generating a greater emission of pollutants.

2.2 Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) method

Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) is a paradigm where all decisions regard-

ing to air traffic management are based on the principals of information sharing
and on collaborative decision making with related partners in airport [6]. Most of
the airports that use CDM systems have updated information with the partners
related. And, with that, a global vision of the total scenarios of the air traffic
allows a better planning.
CDM systems have been used in Europe, USA and other developed countries
over the world. In the USA it was initially used to handle the airports capacity
reduction, on days of bad weather through Ground Delay Program (GDP). In
Europe, CDM system is used to have a better predictability of airport operation
and to avoid that it would become the bottleneck of air traffic.
Without CDM, operational decisions are, in many cases, incorrect, one deci-
sion that is made in local terms will affect the next events that will occur miles
away. CDM has already proven to be applicable to many air traffic management
problems. This paradigm is fundamental that new allocation mechanism arises
to determine a departure sequence.
The Ration-By-Schedule (RBS) is a principal algorithm for slot allocation
in CDM [7]. RBS intends to create a new schedule of allocation of slots with
revised times and allocate the flights originally presented in the old list with this
new schedule. It follows the FCFS rule, when an airline cancels one of its flights,
freeing its slot, another flight from that airline can occupy that slot or the slot
will remain empty.
4 Deborah Ferreira et al.

The Compression [7] is another CDM slot allocation algorithm that aims to
improve slot use, filling the empty slots. Compression will adjust all the flights
to try to fill the empty slots left by cancelled and delayed flights.
Based on the algorithms of CDM, some researches have been developed to
improve these basic concepts and to implement the methods and system to
the airports [1,7,11,13,14,15]. This paper intends to compare the developed two
models: GeDMAN and CoDMAN to disseminate the application of CDM in
more airports.

3 Departure Management with Genetic Algorithms -

GeDMAN
Genetic Departure Management (GeDMAN) is a computational system devel-
oped using Genetic Program to improve the departure management using CDM.
This section presents the main solution and application of this system.

3.1 Genetic Algorithms

Genetic Algorithms (GA) are a search method inspired by principles of natural

selection and by genetics [8]. GA codifies decision variables of search problems
as finite strings formed by alphabets of certain cardinality. Strings that form
possible solutions are called chromosomes, the used alphabets are called genes
and the values of these genes are called alleles.
A population of strings is recombined using crossover and mutation to try
finding a generation that is better than the previous one. The main steps for
the implementation of GA are: initialization, evaluation, selection, crossover,
mutation, substitution, and to check the stop condition for end of execution.

3.2 Solution Modeling

In this solution only the departure has been taken into account, to simplify
the implementation. In Brasilia International Airport (BSB), the slot allocation
process has still not been implemented. In first step, it is needed to create slots
based on the flight’s HOTRAN. The slot size was defined as 1 minute and each
scheduled flight were assigned to the slot closest to its defined departure time.
To use GA, we need to create a genetic representation of the problem, with
the following genetic algorithm structures: gene, chromosome, population, selec-
tion, mutation, crossover and fitness function.

Gene In this solution, the genes are represented by the flights and each slot
will be a locus, i.e., the gene position. The flights departure sequence will be
the population’s individuals. Each flight only can belong to one slot, or else the
flight would departure at two different slots. Each flight is identified by its flight
number and its airline, Figure 1 shows an example with 6 genes (6 flights) and
their 6 positions(6 slots).
 GeDMAN and CoDMAN 5

Fig. 1. Gene and chromosome structure.

Chromosome Each chromosome represents a possible solution to a problem,

it is composed by several genes. In this solution, the chromosome is formed by
a number array, where each element of the array is a flight that belongs to a
airline, Figure 1 shows an example of a chromosome string. If we choose a 4 hour
interval to study, with a 1 minute slot size, each chromosome will have 240 slots.

Population The population is composed of a set of chromosomes, in this case,

it is composed by all departure sequences generated using the reproducing mech-
anism and possible solutions.

Selection The individuals are selected using the Roulette-Wheel Method[9],

where the probability to choose an individual is proportional to its fitness value,
so the fittest individuals will more likely be chosen for reproduction. In each
generation, the fittest 20% of the population will be preserved and the remaining
will be replaced by the new generation.

Mutation The mutation will occur with a low probability Pm between 0.01 and
0.005, this probability must be low because a high value of Pm will expand the
search space and the convergence will take more time to happen.

Crossover The crossover has to consider that no flight can be removed from a
chromosome and duplicate flights can not occur, so the type of crossover used
was the order bases crossover, used for permutation problems. The crossover
probability Pc used in this work is between 0.7 and 0.9.

Fitness Function The fitness function should reflect this work objectives, the
used fitness function is presented on Equation 1:
1


 Pn × e, if e > 0
 ( j=1 tdelayj )
f= 1 (1)

 Pn
 , if e = 0
( j=1 tdelayj )
The previous equation presents the fitness function, where n is the number of
flights, tdelay is the delay time of flight j. The airline is supposed to communicate
early if an delay will occur, if the airline does so, it will be recompensed with
better slots in a new allocation, so the variable e represents the number of airlines
6 Deborah Ferreira et al.

that benefit from this new allocation, considering the airlines that collaborated.
If at least one airline were benefited, this will increase the fitness value(case 1 of
Equation 1). If no airline is benefited by the new slot allocation, then the fitness
value will be computed using case 2 on Equation 1.
(
tcdj − tpdj , if tcdj − tpdj ≥ −5
tdelay = (2)
|tcdj − tpdj |, if tcdj − tpdj < −5
The Equation 2 presentes how tdelay is computed, tcd is the confirmed de-
parture time and tpd is the predicted departure time, if tcdj − tpdj < −5 then
tdelay will be computed using case 1 of Equation 2, that means that the flight
can be advanced for a maximum of 5 minutes, if tcdj − tpdj < 0 that means that
the flight is advanced. If tcdj − tpdj ≥ −5(case 2 of Equation 2)it means that the
flight is very advanced and this solution should not be used, so we will consider
the absolute value and the fitness value will decrease, making this solution less
likely to be selected for reproduction.

3.3 Results

The genetic algorithm reached convergence with a population size n = 1000

and a number of generations g = 100. Two values of mutation probability were
tested to verify the model sensibility: Pm = 0.01 and Pm = 0.005. Crossover
probability also was tested with two different values: Pc = 0.7 and Pc = 0.9
Two test cases were determined and data from real flights of Brasilia Inter-
national Airport were collected:

Case 1 - Rush Hour All departed flights at time between 8 a.m. and 12 a.m.
on 20 november of 2013. The total real delay of all flights was 21 hours and 37
minutes.

Case 2 - Not Rush Hour All departed flights at time between 4 p.m. and 8
p.m. The total real delay of all flights was 11 hours and 12 minutes.

The results with the application of GeDMAN are presented on Tables 1 and 2.
The first column presents the total delay of all flights, the second column presents
the average delay by flight, third column shows the mutation probability and
the last column presents crossover probability.
The best result obtained on Case 1 is on the last row of Table 1, with Pm =
0.005 and Pc = 0.7.
The best result obtained on Case 2 is on the last row of Table 2, with Pm =
0.01 and Pc = 0.7.
To verify the efficiency of this model, we compared the real flight data with
the obtained results from GeDMAN and the comparison is presented on Table 3.
First column shows the scenario, second and third column show the mutation
and crossover probability. The fourth column presents the difference between
real delay and the obtained delay and the last column presents the reduction
obtained in percentage.
 GeDMAN and CoDMAN 7

Table 1. Results obtained with GeDMAN on Case 1.

Total Delay Average Delay Mutation Probability Crossover Probability

17h e 33min 21min 0.01 0.9
14h e 40min 18min 0.005 0.9
17h e 21min 21min 0.01 0.7
14h e 5min 17min 0.005 0.7

Table 2. Results obtained with GeDMAN on Case 2.

Total Delay Average Delay Mutation Probability Crossover Probability

9h e 40min 13min 0.01 0.9
8h e 2min 11min 0.005 0.9
6h e 32min 9min 0.01 0.7
9h e 43min 13min 0.005 0.7

Table 3. Comparison between real data and obtained data.

Case Mutation Probability Crossover Probability Difference Reduction

1 0.01 0.9 3h e 4min 14%
1 0.005 0.9 6h e 47min 31%
1 0.01 0.7 4h e 16min 19%
1 0.005 0.7 7h e 32min 35%
2 0.01 0.9 1h e 32 min 13%
2 0.005 0.9 3h e 10min 28%
2 0.01 0.7 4h e 40min 41%
2 0.005 0.7 1h e 29min 13%

Table 3 show that the best result is obtained in Case 2, with Pm = 0.01 and
Pc = 0.7. Case 2 has more empty slots than Case 1, so it has more space for
the GeDMAN to explore a better solution. In all the studied cases the results
obtained with GeDMAN were better than the real data.

4 Departure Management with Game Theory - CoDMAN

Collaborative Departure Management (CoDMAN) [11] is a modeling that uses
Game Theory, where each one of the agents in the model is an aircraft that im-
pacts the negotiation process to present the movement in the considered airport.

4.1 Game Theory

Game theory is a mathematic theory to study the strategic interactions among
agents in extremely competitive markets with a payoff matrix and decision trees
8 Deborah Ferreira et al.

approach [11]. A game is a situation that involves interactions between rational

agents that behaves strategically and that can be formally analyzed through a
game. Therefore, Game Theory has the following elements: game, interactions,
agents, rationality and strategic behavior.
A game can be cooperative or noncooperative: “a cooperative game is a
game in which the players can make binding commitments, as opposed to a
noncooperative game, in which they cannot”.

4.2 Solution Modeling

CoDMAN proposes the use of Game Theory concepts in the tactical planning
of the flight realization, distributing in an efficient and coordinate manner the
existing slots, according with the demand. It is necessary that the involved agents
participate in a game with perfect information, i.e., where everyone have the
knowledge about themselves and the others.
The contribution of this approach is the fact that the responsibility for airport
incidents, which resides with the air traffic controllers, is transferred directly
to rational agents. They act in a scenario where the negotiation strength will
be a determinant factor in the slot allocation success, with all the operational
requirements imposed by legislation and airport restrictions.
Firstly, the slots for the aircraft are allocate in FIFO (first in, first out) order.
Each aircraft is queued to zero or void, in the ideal case. However, when a flight
wants to occupy a non-empty position, this newly inserted aircraft forces the
queue manipulation, then inflicting unpredicted delay to some (or all) of the
considered flights.
An aircraft can adopt the following actions during a negociation:
1. Try catch the next slot, advancing a position in the line;
2. Spare its slot to another aircraft, losing a position in the line;
3. Remain in its slot.
When a conflict of interest is detected, a situation of negotiation arises and
the agent receives a payoff. This payoff is not directly used as priority attribute,
but it is useful for a measure of negotiation quality.
The importance of the negotiation is that it gives the aircraft an opportunity
to adjust its departure slots. It is important to have its individual interests in
mind, i.e., the aircraft selfishly searches for the best position in the departure
queue. Its interests must be approved by the airport, that will validate or not
the proposition.
Therefore, each aircraft, playing the role of proposer, can propose an accept-
able offer. The consequence is the elaboration of an offer that will bring it a
bigger benefit, while the restrictions of the arbitrator are observed and the op-
ponent aircraft eventually consider the offer as plausible(even if it is not accepted
at first).
If an offer is considered invalid, the proponent aircraft is automatically as-
sumed to be the loser of this negotiation and the last opponents valid offer is
applied. Otherwise, the negotiation will eventually end without an agreement
 GeDMAN and CoDMAN 9

and the arbiter will impose the decision among all of those that were offered. It
is important to point out that priority is given to the incoming aircraft instead
of those who wish to take off. This factor has a crucial influence in the arbiter’s
decision.

4.3 Results
To test the applicability and efficiency of CoDMAN, two case studies were cre-
ated with the real data from Brasilia International Airport as scenario:
Case 1: Strategic Allocation In this case, the departure sequence is con-
sidered as a static process. There is no data manipulation in real time. The
departure queue is traversed and the aircraft that are interested in exchanging
slots are identified and an attempt to negotiate with the next aircraft on the
queue is made. The flight plans of 202 aircraft were analyzed in this case.
Case 2: Dynamic Allocation In this case we need to consider two factors:
1. The high demand for arrivals;
2. Conflicting schedules of takeoff between two or more aircrafts, when an ad-
just of the departure time is needed.
The first factor has direct influence in the airport. The limitations referring
to the runway used must be followed. When the airport capacity for departure
reaches zero, a security delay is applied for the next aircraft on the queue. When
the next aircraft is delayed, all other aircraft will also be delayed for departure.
In this case 518 flights were analyzed.
Tables 4 and 5 presents the results for Case 1, the first column shows the
evaluated attributes and second column shows its value. Table 4 presents the
flight information without use of CoDMAN, and Table 5 shows the results with
the negotiations provided by CoDMAN. Comparing these two tables, we can see
that the delay and cost were reduced with use of CoDMAN, the total delay was
reduce by 16.4%.

Table 4. Departure results with static allocation(without negociation).

Attribute Result
Flights out of schedule 35
Average delay by delayed aircraft 2.09 minutes
Average cost by delayed aircraft 17.779
Total delay 73 minutes
Total delay cost in this case 622.267

Tables 6 and 7 present the results for Case 2. Table 6 presents the flight infor-
mation without negotiation, and Table 7 presents the results with negotiations.
The total delay was reduced by 15.1%
10 Deborah Ferreira et al.

Table 5. Departure results with static allocation(with negociation).

Attribute Result
Flights out of schedule 36
Average delay by delayed aircraft 1.69 minutes
Average cost by delayed aircraft 14.3916
Total delay 61 minutes
Total delay cost in this case 518.097

Table 6. Departure results with dynamic allocation(without negociation).

Attribute Result
Flights out of schedule 43
Average delay by delayed aircraft 2 minutes
Average cost by delayed aircraft 17.0643
Total delay 86 minutes
Total delay cost in this case 733.767

Table 7. Departure results with dynamic allocation(with negociation).

Attribute Result
Flights out of schedule 45
Average delay by delayed aircraft 1.62 minutes
Average cost by delayed aircraft 13.1282
Total delay 73 minutes
Total delay cost in this case 590.77

5 Comparing GeDMAN and CoDMAN

As an information system, GeDMAN uses Genetic Algorithm to provide a solu-
tion to determine the sequence of aircraft in the runway. CoDMAN uses Game
Theory to develop a dynamic negotiation platform in order to allocate the slots
for suitable flights.
Using GeDMAN on flight plans, a reduction of 41% in the total delay was
possible for outside rush hour during one day in Brasilia International Airport.
With CoDMAN, the maximum reduction was 16%. Both are interesting models,
but were developed with different approaches. GeDMAN is an optimistic model,
where all the aircraft are supposed to cooperate and they want the best sce-
nario for all the airlines involved. CoDMAN is a more pessimistic model, where
the airlines are always trying the best for only themselves, not considering the
total picture. Table 8 presents a comparison of some aspects of GeDMAN and
CoDMAN.
 GeDMAN and CoDMAN 11

Table 8. Comparison between GeDMAN and CoDMAN.

GeDMAN CoDMAN
Reduction of 41% of total delay time Reduction of 16% of total delay time
Aims to reduce total delay Aims to reduce cost of delay
Optimistic model Pessimistic model

An interesting approach would be to use the GeDMAN to create a ideal

departure sequence to be used as an input for the CoDMAN to create a more
realistic and applicable departure sequence.

6 Conclusion
Collaborative Decision Making is an important mechanism to improve the effi-
ciency of the traffic flow management in airports. To determine the departure
sequence is one basic process in Airport CDM system. In this research, we suc-
cessfully developed two information models: GeDMAN and CoDMAN to manage
the departure sequence to support the decision making by air traffic controller.
The study is important with the motivation to improve the actual situation that
today is empirically done in Brazil. ATC agency, airlines, airports and passen-
gers would be benefited by the new procedure of the decision making. With the
common sharing the information, the delay time would be reduced and the flight
controllers would have less workload on their hands, reducing the risks of human
error.
Both models have been proven, through several test cases with real data from
Brasilia International Airport to have the potential to reduce the total delay time
and help flight controllers with the departure management task.
One possible future work is to implement GeDMAN and CoDMAN models to
airports and Brazilian Air Navigation Management Center (CGNA) and related
ATC units to assist the air traffic controllers and to realize the collaborative
management among the ATC agency, airlines and airport managers in real day
and day operation.

References
1. Rosa, L.P., Ferreira, D.M., Cruciol, Leonardo L.B.V., Weigang L., Deng X.J.: Ge-
netic algorithms for management of taxi scheduling. In: The 2013 International
Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2013, Las Vegas. CSREA Press (2013)
2. FAA: Federal aviation administration. Available online, http://www.faa.gov/ (2013)
3. Anagnostakis, I., Clarke, J.P.: Runway operations planning: a two-stage solution
methodology. In System Sciences, 2003. Proceedings of 36th Annual Hawaii Inter-
national Conference (2003)
 12 Deborah Ferreira et al.

4. Inframerica: Operational Movements - Brasilia International Airport. Available on-

line, http://www.bsb.aero/ (2013)
5. DECEA – Departamento de controle do espaço aéreo - Department of airspace
control. Available online http://www.decea.gov.br (2013)
6. EUROCONTROL. Airport CDM Implementation – The Manual for Collaborative
Decision Making. Technical Report (2010)
7. Vossen, T. and Ball, M.: Optimization and mediated bartering models for ground
delay programs. Naval Research Logistics, 53(1):75-90 (2006)
8. Kenneth, D.J., William, M.S., Diana, F.G.: Using genetic algorithms for concept
learning, Springer (1994)
9. Colin, R.R., Jonathan, Genetic Algorithms - Principles and Perspectives: E.R: A
Guide to GA Theory. Operations Research/Computer Science Interfaces Series.
Springer (2003)
10. Bugarin, M.S., Sotomayor, M.A.O: Lições de teoria dos jogos, São Paulo, Brazil
(2007)
11. Ribeiro, V. F., Weigang, L: Collaborative Decision Making with game theory for
slot allocation and departure sequencing in airports. In: 17th Air Transport Research
Society (ATRS) World Conference, 2013, Bergamo. The proceedings of 17th ATRS
World Conference. Canada: ATRS (2013)
12. Foster, I., Kesselman, C.: The Grid: Blueprint for a New Computing Infrastructure.
Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1999)
13. Dib, M. V. P.,Weigang, L.,Melo., A. C. M. A.: Approach of Balancing of the Nego-
tiation among Agents in Traffic Synchronization. IEEE Latin America Transactions,
v. 5, p. 338-345 (2007)
14. Weigang, L., Dib, M. V. P., Alves, D. P., Crespo, A. F.: Intelligent computing meth-
ods in Air Traffic Flow Management. Transportation Research. Part C, Emerging
Technologies, 18, 781-793. (2010)
15. Schummer, J. and Vohra, R. V. Assignment of Arrival SLOTS. American Economic
Journal: Microeconomics, vol. 5(2), p. 164-85. (2013)

View publication stats