skip to main content
article

Division of labor in a group of robots inspired by ants' foraging behavior

Published:01 September 2006Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

In this article, we analyze the behavior of a group of robots involved in an object retrieval task. The robots' control system is inspired by a model of ants' foraging. This model emphasizes the role of learning in the individual. Individuals adapt to the environment using only locally available information. We show that a simple parameter adaptation is an effective way to improve the efficiency of the group and that it brings forth division of labor between the members of the group. Moreover, robots that are best at retrieving have a higher probability of becoming active retrievers. This selection of the best members does not use any explicit representation of individual capabilities. We analyze this system and point out its strengths and its weaknesses.

References

  1. Agassounon, W., Martinoli, A., and Easton, K. 2004. Macroscopic modeling of aggregation experiments using agents in teams of constant and time-varying sizes. Autonomous Robots 17, 2--3, 163--192. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Alcock, J. 1995. Animal Behavior 5th Ed. Sinauer, Sunderland, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Balch, T. 1999. The impact of diversity on performance in multi-robot foraging. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Autonomous Agents (Agents'99), O. Etzioni, J. Müller, and J. Bradshaw, Eds. ACM Press, New York, NY. 92--99. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Balch, T. and Arkin, R. 1994. Communication in reactive multiagent robotic systems. Autonomous Robots 1, 1, 27--52. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Bonabeau, E., Theraulaz, G., and Deneubourg, J.-L. 1996. Quantitative study of the fixed threshold model for the regulation of division of labor in insect societies. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B-Biological Sciences 263, 1565--1569.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Camazine, S., Deneubourg, J.-L., Franks, N., Sneyd, J., Theraulaz, G., and Bonabeau, E. 2001. Self-Organisation in Biological Systems. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Cao, Y., Fukunaga, A., and Kahng, A. 1997. Cooperative mobile robotics: Antecedents and directions. Autonomous Robots 4, 1, 7--27. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Deneubourg, J.-L., Goss, S., Pasteels, J., Fresneau, D., and Lachaud, J.-P. 1987. Self-organization mechanisms in ant societies (II): Learning in foraging and division of labor. In From Individual to Collective Behavior in Social Insects, J. Pasteels and J.-L. Deneubourg, Eds. Experientia Supplementum, vol. 54. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, Switzerland, 177--196.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Detrain, C. and Deneubourg, J.-L. 1997. Scavenging by Pheidole Pallidula: A key for understanding decision-making systems in ants. Animal Behaviour 53, 537--547.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Dorigo, M. and Sahin, E. 2004. Guest editorial. Autonomous Robots 17, 2--3, 111--113. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Dorigo, M., Trianni, V., Sahin, E., Groβ, R., Labella, T., Baldassarre, G., Nolfi, S., Deneubourg, J.-L., Mondada, F., Floreano, D., and Gambardella, L. 2004. Evolving self-organizing behaviors for a Swarm-Bot. Autonomous Robots 17, 2--3, 223--245. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Flint, M., E. Fernández-Gaucherand, E., and Polycarpou, M. 2004. A probabilistic framework for passive cooperation among UAV 's performing a search. In Proceedings of the 16th International Symposium on Mathematical Theory of Networks and Systems (MTNS'04), B. De Moor, P. Van Dooren, V. Blondel, and J. Willems, Eds. Leuven, Belgium.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Gerkey, B. and Matarić, M. 2004. A formal analysis and taxonomy of task allocation in multi-robot systems. Int. J. Robotics Resear. 23, 9, 939--954.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Goldberg, D. and Matarić, M. 1997. Interference as a tool for designing and evaluating multi-robot controllers. In Proceedings of the 14th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI'97). MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 637--642. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Grassé, P. 1959. La reconstruction du nid et les coordinations inter-individuelles chez Bellicositermes natalensis et Cubitermes. La théorie de la stigmergie: essai d'interpretation des termites constructeurs. Insectes Sociaux 6, 41--83.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Hayes, A. 2002. How many robots? Group size and efficiency in collective search tasks. In Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Distributed Autonomous Robotic Systems (DARS'02), H. Asama, T. Arai, T. Fukuda, and T. Hasegawa, Eds. Springer Verlag, Heidelberg, Germany, 289--298.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Hölldobler, B. and Wilson, E. 1990. The Ants. Springer Verlag, Heidelberg, Germany.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Ijspeert, A., Martinoli, A., Billard, A., and Gambardella, L. 2001. Collaboration through the exploitation of local interactions in autonomous collective robotics: The stick pulling experiment. Autonomous Robots 11, 2, 149--171. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Jin, Y., Minai, A., and Polycarpou, M. 2003. Cooperative real-time search and task allocation in UAV teams. In Proceedings of the 42nd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control. Vol. 1. IEEE Press, New York, NY, 7--12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Jones, C. and Matarić, M. 2003. Adaptive division of labor in large-scale minimalist multi-robot systems. In IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. Vol. 2. IEEE Press, New York, NY, 1969--1974.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Krieger, M. and Billeter, J.-B. 2000. The call of duty: Self-organised task allocation in a population of up to twelve mobile robots. Robotics Autonom. Syst. 30, 1--2, 65-- 84.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Labella, T. 2003. Prey retrieval by a swarm of robots. Thesis for the Diplôme d'Études Approfondies (DEA). Tech. rep. TR/IRIDIA/2003-16, IRIDIA, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Li, L., Martinoli, A., and Abu-Mostafa, Y. 2004. Learning and measuring specialization in collaborative swarm systems. Adaptive Behavior 12, 3--4, 199--212. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Mondada, F., Pettinaro, G., Guignard, A., Kwee, I., Floreano, D., Deneubourg, J.-L., Nolfi, S., Gambardella, L., and Dorigo, M. 2004. Swarm-Bot: A new distributed robotic concept. Autonomous Robots 17, 2--3, 193--221. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Montgomery, D. 2000. Design and Analysis of Experiments 5th Ed. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Parker, L. 1998. ALLIANCE: An architecture for fault tolerant multi-robot cooperation. IEEE Trans. Robotics Automat. 14, 2, 220--240.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Press, W., Flannery, B., Teukolsky, S., and Vetterling, W. 1992. Numerical Recipes: The Art of Scientific Computing 2nd Ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Schneider-Fontán, M. and Matarić, M. 1996. A study of territoriality: The role of critical mass in adaptive task division. In From Animals to Animats 4, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior (SAB'96), P. Maes, M. Matarić, J.-A. Meyer, J. Pollack, and S. Wilson, Eds. MIT Press/Bradford Books, Cambridge, MA, 553--561.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Siegel, S. and Castellan Jr. N. 1988. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Science 2nd Ed. Statistics Series. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Sutton, R. and Barto, A. 1998. Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Webb, B. 2000. What does robotics offer animal behaviour? Animal Behaviour 60, 5, 545--558.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Division of labor in a group of robots inspired by ants' foraging behavior

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader
        About Cookies On This Site

        We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

        Learn more

        Got it!