Artificial Life and Robotics

, Volume 2, Issue 3, pp 102–107 | Cite as

Self-organization based on nonlinear nonequilibrium. Dynamics of autonomous agents

Original Article


This paper discusses a study on the mechanism of self-organization. A global order is organized by the simple and locally coordinated actions of autonomous agents using only local information, so complex or globally coordinated actions which use global communication and high-level strategies are not necessary. The fundamental factors for establishing a global order using self-organization are a “dissipative structure,” an “autocatalysis mechanism,” and “intentional fluctuations.” If an environment where there are agents has a dissipative structure and those agents have some sort of autocatalysis and intentional fluctuation mechanisms within themselves, it is possible to form a global order for them using only their simple and locally coordinated actions. “The blind-hunger dilemma” is used as an example to simulate the self-organization and coordinated actions of agents. In this simulation environment, there are many ant-like agents which must get energy. However, there is only one small energy supply base, so either an efficient method or the coordinated actions of agents is needed. As a result, the agents using our approach could move and get energy more efficiently than agents using conventional coordination mechanisms involving global communication and high-level strategies.

Key words

Self-organization Dissipative structure Autocatalysis mechanism Intentional fluctuation Autonomous agent Coordination of agent 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Numaoka C (1995) Introducing the blind hunger dilemma: agent properties and performance. Proceedings of ICMAS'95, pp. 290–296Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    O'Hare GMP, Jennings NR (1996) Foundations of distributed artificial intelligence. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ekenberg L (1996) Modelling Decentralised Decision Making. Proceedings of ICMAS'96, pp. 64–71Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Balch T, Arkin RC (1995) Motor Schema-Based Formation Control for Multiagent Robot Teams. Proceedings of ICMAS'95, pp. 10–16Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nicolis G, Prigogine I (1977) Self-organization in nonequilibrium systems. Wiley, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Haken H (1983) Instability of self-organizing system and devices. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Deneubourg JL (1991) The dynamics of collective sorting robot-like ants and ant-like robots. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior: From Animals to Animals, pp. 356–363Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goss S, Deneubourg JL (1992) Harvesting by a group of robots. Proceedings of the First European Conference on Artificial Life: Toward a Practice of Autonomous Systems, pp. 71–80Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kubo M, Kakazu Y (1994) Evaluation of coordinated motions of multi-agent systems on competition for food between ant colonies (in Japanese). J Inf Proc Soc J 35:1555–1566Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yamada S (1996) Controlling deliberation with success probability in a dynamic environment. Proceedings of AIPS'96, pp. 251–258Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Georgeff MP, Lansky AL (1987) Reactive reasoning and planning. Proceedings of AAAI, pp. 677–682Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kurihara S, Okada M, Nakatsu R (1995) A coordinative structure in man-machine interactions. Proceedings of HCI'95, pp. 123Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ISAROB 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.NTT Optical Network Systems LaboratoriesKanagawaJapan

Personalised recommendations