skip to main content
research-article

Property-Driven Design for Robot Swarms: A Design Method Based on Prescriptive Modeling and Model Checking

Authors Info & Claims
Published:19 December 2014Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

In this article, we present property-driven design, a novel top-down design method for robot swarms based on prescriptive modeling and model checking. Traditionally, robot swarms have been developed using a code-and-fix approach: in a bottom-up iterative process, the developer tests and improves the individual behaviors of the robots until the desired collective behavior is obtained. The code-and-fix approach is unstructured, and the quality of the obtained swarm depends completely on the expertise and ingenuity of the developer who has little scientific or technical support in his activity. Property-driven design aims at providing such scientific and technical support, with many advantages compared to the traditional unstructured approach. Property-driven design is composed of four phases: first, the developer formally specifies the requirements of the robot swarm by stating its desired properties; second, the developer creates a prescriptive model of the swarm and uses model checking to verify that this prescriptive model satisfies the desired properties; third, using the prescriptive model as a blueprint, the developer implements a simulated version of the desired robot swarm and validates the prescriptive model developed in the previous step; fourth, the developer implements the desired robot swarm and validates the previous steps. We demonstrate property-driven design using two case studies: aggregation and foraging.

References

  1. C. Baier and J.-P. Katoen. 2008. Principles of Model Checking. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. W. Banzhaf and N. Pillay. 2007. Why complex systems engineering needs biological development. Complexity 13, 2, 12--21. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. K. Beck. 2003. Test-Driven Development: By Example. Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. S. Berman, A. Halasz, M. A. Hsieh, and V. Kumar. 2009. Optimized stochastic policies for task allocation in swarms of robots. IEEE Transactions on Robotics 25, 4, 927--937. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. S. Berman, V. Kumar, and R. Nagpal. 2011. Design of control policies for spatially inhomogeneous robot swarms with application to commercial pollination. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA'11). 378--385.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. R. H. Bordini. 2009. Multi-Agent Programming: Languages, Tools and Applications, Vol. 2. Springer, New York. NY. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. M. Brambilla, M. Dorigo, and M. Birattari. 2014. Property-Driven Design for Robot Swarms A Design Method Based on Prescriptive Modeling and Model Checking. Supplementary material available at http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/supp/IridiaSupp2014-003/index.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. M. Brambilla, E. Ferrante, M. Birattari, and M. Dorigo. 2013. Swarm robotics: A review from the swarm engineering perspective. Swarm Intelligence 7, 1, 1--41.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. M. Brambilla, C. Pinciroli, M. Birattari, and M. Dorigo. 2012. Property-driven design for swarm robotics. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS'12). 139--146. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. A. Brutschy. 2014. The TAM: A Device for Task Abstraction in Swarm Robotics Research. Technical Report TR/IRIDIA/2010-015.005. IRIDIA, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. F. Ciesinski and M. Größer. 2004. On probabilistic computation tree logic. In Validation of Stochastic Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2925. Springer, 333--355.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. C. Dixon, A. Winfield, and M. Fisher. 2012. Towards temporal verification of swarm robotic systems. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 60, 11, 1429--1441. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. M. Dorigo, M. Birattari, and M. Brambilla. 2014. Swarm robotics. Scholarpedia 9, 1, 1463.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. G. Francesca, M. Brambilla, A. Brutschy, L. Garattoni, R. Miletitch, G. Podevijn, A. Reina, T. Soleymani, M. Salvaro, C. Pinciroli, V. Trianni, and M. Birattari. 2014a. An experiment in automatic design of robot swarms. In Swarm Intelligence. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 8667. Springer, 25--37.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. G. Francesca, M. Brambilla, A. Brutschy, V. Trianni, and M. Birattari. 2014b. AutoMoDe: A novel approach to the automatic design of control software for robot swarms. Swarm Intelligence 8, 2, 89--112.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. D. Goldberg and M. J. Matarić. 2001. Design and evaluation of robust behavior-based controllers for distributed multi-robot collection tasks. In Robot Teams: From Diversity to Polymorphism. A. K. Peters, Natick, MA, 315--344.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. A. Gutiérrez, A. Campo, M. Dorigo, J. Donate, F. Monasterio-Huelin, and L. Magdalena. 2009. Open e-puck range & bearing miniaturized board for local communication in swarm robotics. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA'09). 3111--3116. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. H. Hamann. 2013. Towards swarm calculus: Urn models of collective decisions and universal properties of swarm performance. Swarm Intelligence 7, 2--3, 145--172.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. H. Hamann and H. Wörn. 2008. A framework of space--time continuous models for algorithm design in swarm robotics. Swarm Intelligence 2, 2, 209--239.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. H. Hansson and B. Jonsson. 1994. A logic for reasoning about time and reliability. Formal Aspects of Computing 6, 5, 512--535.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. R. Jeanson, C. Rivault, J.-L. Deneubourg, S. Blanco, R. Fournier, C. Jost, and G. Theraulaz. 2005. Self-organized aggregation in cockroaches. Animal Behaviour 69, 1, 169--180.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. S. Kazadi, J. R. Lee, and J. Lee. 2009. Model independence in swarm robotics. International Journal of Intelligent Computing and Cybernetics: Special Issue on Swarm Robotics 2, 4, 672--694.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. S. Konur, C. Dixon, and M. Fisher. 2012. Analysing robot swarm behaviour via probabilistic model checking. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 60, 2, 199--213. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. M. Kwiatkowska, G. Norman, and D. Parker. 2004. Probabilistic symbolic model checking with PRISM: A hybrid approach. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer 6, 2, 128--142. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. K. Lerman and A. Galstyan. 2002. Mathematical model of foraging in a group of robots: Effect of interference. Autonomous Robots 13, 2, 127--141. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. K. Lerman, A. Martinoli, and A. Galstyan. 2005. A review of probabilistic macroscopic models for swarm robotic systems. In Swarm Robotics. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3342. Springer, 143--152. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. M. Massink, M. Brambilla, D. Latella, M. Dorigo, and M. Birattari. 2013. On the use of Bio-PEPA for modelling and analysing collective behaviours in swarm robotics. Swarm Intelligence 7, 2--3, 201--228.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. J. Miller and J. Mukerji. 2003. MDA Guide V1.0.1. Retrieved November 2, 2014, from http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?omg/03-06-01.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. F. Mondada, M. Bonani, X. Raemy, J. Pugh, C. Cianci, A. Klaptocz, S. Magnenat, J.-C. Zufferey, D. Floreano, and A. Martinoli. 2009. The e-puck, a robot designed for education in engineering. In Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Autonomous Robot Systems and Competitions, Vol. 1. 59--65.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. V. Nimal. 2010. Statistical Approaches for Probabilistic Model Checking. MSc Mini-Project Dissertation. Oxford University Computing Laboratory, Oxford, UK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. C. Pinciroli, V. Trianni, R. O'Grady, G. Pini, A. Brutschy, M. Brambilla, N. Mathews, E. Ferrante, G. Di Caro, F. Ducatelle, M. Birattari, L. M. Gambardella, and M. Dorigo. 2012. ARGoS: A modular, parallel, multi-engine simulator for multi-robot systems. Swarm Intelligence 6, 4, 271--295.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. G. Pini, A. Brutschy, M. Birattari, and M. Dorigo. 2009. Interference reduction through task partitioning in a robotic swarm. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Informatics in Control, Automation, and Robotics (ICINCO'09). 52--59.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. E. Şahin. 2005. Swarm robotics: From sources of inspiration to domains of application. In Swarm Robotics. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3342. Springer, 10--20. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. R. F. Serfozo. 1979. An equivalence between continuous and discrete time Markov decision processes. Operations Research 27, 3, 616--620.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. J. M. Smith. 1978. Models in Ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. A. F. T. Winfield, J. Sa, M. C. Fernandez-Gago, C. Dixon, and M. Fisher. 2005. On formal specification of emergent behaviours in swarm robotic systems. International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems 2, 4, 363--370.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. M. Wooldridge and N. R. Jennings. 1998. Pitfalls of agent-oriented development. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Autonomous Agents. 385--391. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. F. Zambonelli, N. Jennings, and M. Wooldridge. 2001. Organisational abstractions for the analysis and design of multi-agent systems. In Agent-Oriented Software Engineering. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1957. Springer, 407--422. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. D. Zarzhitsky, D. Spears, D. Thayer, and W. Spears. 2005. Agent-based chemical plume tracing using fluid dynamics. In Formal Approaches to Agent-Based Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3228. Springer, 146--160. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Property-Driven Design for Robot Swarms: A Design Method Based on Prescriptive Modeling and Model Checking

        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!