Theory in Biosciences

, Volume 127, Issue 2, pp 149–161 | Cite as

Stability and performance of ant queue inspired task partitioning methods

  • Alexander Scheidler
  • Daniel Merkle
  • Martin Middendorf
Original Paper


In this paper, we consider computing systems that have autonomous helper components which fulfill support functions and that possess reconfigurable hardware so that they can specialize to different types of service tasks. Several self-organized task partitioning methods are proposed that can be used by the helper components to decide how to reconfigure and which service tasks to execute. The proposed task partitioning methods are inspired by the so-called ant queue system that can be found in real ants for partitioning tasks between the individuals. The aim of this study is to investigate basic properties of the task partitioning methods, like stability and efficiency, in order to obtain basic insights into the design of task partitioning methods in self-organized service systems. More precisely, the investigations are threefold: (1) discrete event simulations are used to investigate systems, (2) for a simple version of the task partitioning system analytical stability results are obtained by means of delay differential equation systems and (3) by numerically solving initial value problems.


Execution Time Social Insect Delay Differential Equation Reconfigurable Hardware Task Partitioning 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This work was supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG) through the project “Organisation and control of self-organising systems in technical compounds” within SPP 1183.


  1. Anderson C, Ratnieks FLW (1999a) Task partitioning in insect societies (i): effect of colony size on queueing delay and colony ergonomic efficiency. Am Nat 154(5):521–535CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson C, Ratnieks FLW (1999b) Task partitioning in insect societies (ii): use of queueing delay information in recruitment. Am Nat 154(5):536–548CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Beshers SN, Fewell JH (2001) Models of division of labor in social insects. Annu Rev Entomol 46:413–440CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bonabeau E, Sobkowski A, Theraulaz G, Deneubourg JL (1997) Adaptive task allocation inspired by a model of division of labor in social insects. In: Bio computation and emergent computing. World Scientific, Singapore, pp 36–45Google Scholar
  5. Bonabeau E, Theraulaz G, Dorigo M (1999) Swarm intelligence: from natural to artificial systems. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Campos M, Bonabeau E, Thraulaz G, Deneubourg J-L (2000) Dynamic scheduling and division of labor in social insects. Adapt Behav 8:83–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cicirello VA, Smith SF (2001a) Insect societies and manufacturing. In: Proceedings of IJCAI-01 workshop on artificial intelligence and manufacturing, pp 33–38Google Scholar
  8. Cicirello VA, Smith SF (2001b) Wasp nests for self-configurable factories. In: Proceedings of fifth international conference on autonomous agents, pp 473–480Google Scholar
  9. Cicirello VA, Smith SF (2004) Wasp-like agents for distributed factory coordination. J Auton Agent Multi Agent Syst 8(3):237–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cooke KL, Grossman Z (1982) Discrete delay, distributed delay and stability switches. J Math Anal Appl 86:592–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dailey Paulson L (2002) Computer system, heal thyself. Computer 35:20–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Deneubourg JL, Theraulaz G, Bonabeau E (1998) Response threshold reinforcement and division of labour in insect societies. Proc R Soc Lond B 265:327–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fox A, Patterson D (2003) Self-repairing computers. Sci Am 288(6):54–61CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Freedman HI, Kuang Y (1991) Stability switches in linear scalar neutral delay equations. Funkcialaj Ekvacioj 34:187–209Google Scholar
  15. Gervet J, Deneubourg JL, Theraulaz G, Goss S (1991) Task differentiation in polistes wasp colonies: a model for self-organizing groups of robots. In: From animals to animats: proceedings of the first international conference on simulation of adaptive behavior, pp 346–355Google Scholar
  16. GI (2003) Organic computing/VDE, ITG, GI—PositionspapierGoogle Scholar
  17. Jeanne RL (1986) The organization of work in polybia occidentalis: costs and benefits of specialization in a social wasp. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 19:333–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jones C, Mataric MJ (2003) Adaptive division of labor in large-scale minimalist multi-robot systems. In: Proceedings of the intelligent robots and systems 2003 (IROS 2003), vol 2, pp 1969–1974Google Scholar
  19. Krieger MJ, Billeter JB, Keller L (2000) Ant-like task allocation and recruitment in cooperative robots. Nature 406:992–995CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Labella TH, Dorigo M, Deneubourg J-L (2006) Division of labour in a group of robots inspired by ants’ foraging behaviour. ACM ACM Trans Auton Adapt Syst 1:4–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Merkle D, Middendorf M, Scheidler A (2006a) Self-organized task allocation for computing systems with reconfigurable components. In: Proceedings of 9th international workshop on nature inspired distributed computing (NIDISC’06), IEEE, p 8Google Scholar
  22. Merkle D, Middendorf M, Scheidler A (2006b) Using decentralized clustering for task allocation in networks with reconfigurable helper units. In: Proceedings of international workshop on self-organizing systems 2006 (IWSOS 2006), number 4124 in LNCS. Springer, Berlin, pp 137–147Google Scholar
  23. Morley G (1996) Painting trucks at general motors: the effectiveness of a complexity-based approach. In: Embracing complexity: exploring the application of complex adaptive systems to business, pp 53–58Google Scholar
  24. Mueller-Schloer C, von der Malsburg C, Wuertz RP (2004) Organic computing. Informatik Spektrum 27(4):332–336Google Scholar
  25. Nouyan S, Ghizzioli R, Birattari M, Dorigo M (2005) An insect-based algorithm for the dynamic task allocation problem. Künstliche Intelligenz 4:25–31Google Scholar
  26. Schmeck H (2005) Organic computing—a new vision for distributed embedded systems. In: Proceedings of the eighth IEEE international symposium on object-oriented real-time distributed computing (ISORC 2005), pp 201–203Google Scholar
  27. Würtz RP (ed) (2008) Organic computing. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexander Scheidler
    • 1
  • Daniel Merkle
    • 2
  • Martin Middendorf
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of LeipzigLeipzigGermany
  2. 2.Departement of Mathematics and Computer ScienceUniversity of Southern DenmarkOdense MDenmark

Personalised recommendations