Investigating dominant situation of resting behavior as a potential labor pool in robotic swarm for group foraging

Abstract

The foraging task is a commonly studied scenario for distributed swarm robotic systems. The robots switch searching and resting behavior in a distributed manner to perform foraging quickly and energy efficiently. It is known that robots that are resting can act as a potential labor pool in addition to saving energy. Because they function as a potential labor pool, resting robots can help with foraging if needed. In this study, we consider the group foraging task, which requires two or more robots to transport a food item. In a group foraging task, resting robots can help with the transportation of a heavy food item in response to the recruitment of other robots. Until now, the efficacy of the resting behavior as a potential labor pool has been suggested, but the environments in which this function is dominant is still unknown. In this study, we propose a state-transition model for robots that includes the resting behavior and investigate the performance through multi-agent simulation. By comparing models with and without the resting behavior, we found that the function of the resting behavior as a potential labor pool is dominant in cases when the food items are heavy or the population is small.

Keywords

Task allocation group foraging recruitment swarm robotics

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Barrientos

Colorado

Cerro

Martinez

Rossi

Sanz

Valente

(2011). Aerial remote sensing in agriculture: A practical approach to area coverage and path planning for fleets of mini aerial robots. Journal of Field Robotics, 28(5), 667–689. https://doi.org/10.1002/rob.20403

Bayindir

(2016). A review of swarm robotics tasks. Neurocomputing, 172(4), 292–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2015.05.116

Berman

Lindsey

Sakar

M. S.

Kumar

Pratt

S. C.

(2011). Experimental study and modeling of group retrieval in ants as an approach to collective transport in swarm robotic systems. Proceedings of the IEEE, 99(9), 1470–1481. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2011.2111450

Bonabeau

Theraulaz

Deneubourg

J. L.

(1998). Fixed response thresholds and the regulation of division of labor in insect societies. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 60(4), 753–807. https://doi.org/10.1006/bulm.1998.0041

Brambilla

Ferrante

Birattari

Dorigo

(2013). Swarm robotics: A review from the swarm engineering perspective. Swarm Intelligence, 7(1), 1–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11721-012-0075-2

Brutschy

Pini

Pinciroli

Birattari

Dorigo

(2014). Self-organized task allocation to sequentially interdependent tasks in swarm robotics. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 28(1), 101–125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-012-9212-y

Castello

Yamamoto

Libera

F. D.

Liu

Winfield

A. F. T.

Nakamura

Ishiguro

(2016). Adaptive foraging for simulated and real robotic swarms: The dynamical response threshold approach. Swarm Intelligence, 10(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11721-015-0117-7

Castello

Yamamoto

Nakamura

Ishiguro

(2013). Task allocation for a robotic swarm based on an adaptive response threshold model. 13th International Conference on Control, Automation and Systems (ICCAS 2013), 259–266. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCAS.2013.6703905

Charbonneau

Dornhaus

(2015). When doing nothing is something. how task allocation strategies compromise between flexibility, efficiency, and inactive agents. Journal of Bioeconomics, 17(3), 217–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10818-015-9205-4

10.

Charbonneau

Sasaki

Dornhaus

(2017). Who needs ‘lazy’ workers? Inactive workers act as a ‘reserve’ labor force replacing active workers, but inactive workers are not replaced when they are removed. PLoS One, 12(9), Article e0184074. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0184074

11.

Chen

Gauci

Kolling

Gros

(2015). Occlusion-based cooperative transport with a swarm of miniature mobile robots. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 31(2), 307–321. https://doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2015.2400731

12.

Daly-Schveitzer

Beugnon

Lachaud

J. P.

(2007). Prey weight and overwhelming difficulty impact the choice of retrieval strategy in the neotropical ant gnamptogenys sulcata (f. smith). Insectes Sociaux, 54(4), 319–328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00040-007-0949-2

13.

Davidson

J. D.

Arauco-Aliaga

R. P.

Crow

Gordon

D. M.

Goldman

M. S.

(2016). Effect of interactions between harvester ants on forager decisions. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 4(1), 115–117. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2016.00115

14.

Digani

Sabattini

Secchi

Fantuzzi

(2013). Towards decentralized coordination of multi robot systems in industrial environments: A hierarchical traffic control strategy. In 2013 IEEE 9th international conference on intelligent computer communication and processing (ICCP) (pp. 209–215). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCP.2013.6646110

15.

Farivarnejad

Wilson

Berman

(2016). Decentralized sliding mode control for autonomous collective transport by multi-robot systems. In 2016 IEEE 55th conference on decision and control (pp. 1826–1833). CDC. https://doi.org/10.1109/CDC.2016.7798530

16.

Feinerman

Pinkoviezky

Gelblum

Fonio

Gov

N. S.

(2018). The physics of cooperative transport in groups of ants. Nature Physics, 14(7), 683–693. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-018-0107-y

17.

Ferrante

Turgut

A. E.

Duéñez-Guzmán

Dorigo

Wenseleers

(2015). Evolution of self-organized task specialization in robot swarms. PLoS Computational Biology, 11(8), Article e1004321. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004273

18.

Fujisawa

Dobata

Sugawara

Matsuno

(2014). Designing pheromone communication in swarm robotics: Group foraging behavior mediated by chemical substance. Swarm Intelligence, 8(3), 227–246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11721-014-0097-z

19.

Gross

Bonani

Mondada

Dorigo

(2006). Autonomous self-assembly in swarm-bots. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 22(6), 1115–1130. https://doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2006.882919

20.

Hamann

(2013). Towards swarm calculus: Urn models of collective decisions and universal properties of swarm performance. Swarm Intelligence, 7(2-3), 145–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11721-013-0080-0

21.

Hasegawa

Ishii

Tada

Kobayashi

Yoshimura

(2016). Lazy workers are necessary for long-term sustainability in insect societies. Scientific Reports, 6(1), Article 20846. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep20846

22.

Hayakawa

Dobata

Matsuno

(2020). Behavioral responses to colony-level properties affect disturbance resistance of red harvester ant colonies. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 492(1), Article 110186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2020.110186

23.

Hunt

E. R.

Jones

Hauert

(2019). Testing the limits of pheromone stigmergy in high-density robot swarms. Royal Society Open Science, 6(11), Article 190225. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.190225

24.

Ijspeert

A. J.

Martinoli

Billard

Gambardella

L. M.

(2001). Collaboration through the exploitation of local interactions in autonomous collective robotics: The stick pulling experiment. Autonomous Robots, 11(2), 149–171. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011227210047

25.

Jin

Liang

Han

Ohkura

(2020). Generating collective foraging behavior for robotic swarm using deep reinforcement learning. Artificial Life and Robotics, 25(4), 588–595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10015-020-00642-2

26.

Jurt

Milner

Sooriyabandara

Hauert

(2022). Collective transport of arbitrarily shaped objects using robot swarms. Artificial Life and Robotics, 27(2), 365–372. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10015-022-00730-5

27.

Kantor

Singh

Peterson

Rus

Das

Kumar

Pereira

Spletzer

(2006). Distributed search and rescue with robot and sensor teams. Field and Service Robotics, 24(1), 529–538.

28.

Krieger

M. J. B.

Billeter

J. B.

(2000). The call of duty: Self-organised task allocation in a population of up to twelve mobile robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 30(1-2), 65–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0921-8890(99)00065-2

29.

Labella

T. H.

Dorigo

Deneubourg

J. L.

(2006). Division of labor in a group of robots inspired by ants’ foraging behavior. ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems, 1(1), 4–25. https://doi.org/10.1145/1152934.1152936

30.

Lee

Vaughan

Kim

(2020). Task allocation into a foraging task with a series of subtasks in swarm robotic system. IEEE Access, 8(1), 107549–107561. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2999538

31.

Liu

Winfield

A. F. T.

(2010). Modeling and optimization of adaptive foraging in swarm robotic systems. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 29(14), 1743–1760. https://doi.org/10.1177/0278364910375139

32.

Liu

Winfield

A. F. T.

Chen

Dou

(2007). Towards energy optimization: Emergent task allocation in a swarm of foraging robots. Adaptive Behavior, 15(3), 289–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059712307082088

33.

McCreery

H. F.

Breed

M. D.

(2014). Cooperative transport in ants: A review of proximate mechanisms. Insectes Sociaux, 61(2), 99–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00040-013-0333-3

34.

Mondada

Gambardella

Floreano

Nolfi

Deneubourg

Dorigo

(2005). The cooperation of swarm-bots: Physical interactions in collective robotics. IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine, 12(2), 21–28. https://doi.org/10.1109/MRA.2005.1458313

35.

Nouyan

Gross

Bonani

Mondada

Dorigo

(2009). Teamwork in self-organized robot colonies. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 13(4), 695–711. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2008.2011746

36.

Olsson

Brown

J. S.

Helf

K. L.

(2008). A guide to central place effects in foraging. Theoretical Population Biology, 74(1), 22–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tpb.2008.04.005

37.

Pini

Brutschy

Frison

Roli

Dorigo

Birattari

(2011). Task partitioning in swarms of robots: An adaptive method for strategy selection. Swarm Intelligence, 5(3-4), 283–304. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11721-011-0060-1

38.

Pini

Gagliolo

Brutschy

Dorigo

Birattari

(2013). Task partitioning in a robot swarm: A study on the effect of communication. Swarm Intelligence, 7(2-3), 173–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11721-013-0078-7

39.

Radeva

Dornhaus

Lynch

Nagpal

H. H.

(2017). Costs of task allocation with local feedback: Effects of colony size and extra workers in social insects and other multi-agent systems. PLoS Computational Biology, 13(12), e1005904–e1005929. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005904

40.

Reynolds

C. W.

(1987). Flocks, herds and schools: A distributed behavioral model. SIGGRAPH Comput. Graph, 21(4), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1145/37402.37406

41.

Schmickl

Karsai

(2014). Sting, carry and stock: How corpse availability can regulate de-centralized task allocation in a ponerine ant colony. PLoS One, 9(12), Article e114611. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0114611

42.

Wang

Schwager

(2016). Kinematic multi-robot manipulation with no communication using force feedback. In 2016 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA) (pp. 427–432). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA.2016.7487163

43.

Wilson

E. O.

(1984). The relation between caste ratios and division of labor in the ant genus Pheidole (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 16(1), 89–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00293108

44.

Wilson

Buffin

Pratt

S. C.

Berman

(2018). Multi-robot replication of ant collective towing behaviours. Royal Society Open Science, 5(10), Article 180409. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.180409

45.

Yang

Zhou

Tian

(2009) Swarm robots task allocation based on response threshold model. In: 2009 4th international conference on autonomous robots and agents (pp. 171–176). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICARA.2000.4803959

46.

Yoshimoto

Endo

Maeda

Matsuno

(2018). Decentralized navigation method for a robotic swarm with nonhomogeneous abilities. Autonomous Robots, 42(8), 1583–1599. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10514-018-9774-x

47.

Yasuda

Ohkura

Matsumura

Goka

(2013). Cooperative transport by a swarm robotic system based on cma-neuroes approach. Journal of Advanced Computational Intelligence and Intelligent Informatics, 17(6), 932–942. https://doi.org/10.20965/jaciii.2013.p0932

48.

Zahugi

E. M. H.

Shabani

A. M.

Prasad

T. V.

(2012). Libot: Design of a low cost mobile robot for outdoor swarm robotics. In 2012 IEEE international conference on cyber Technology in automation, control, and intelligent systems (CYBER) (pp. 342–347). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/CYBER.2012.6392577

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.25 MB