Autonomous Task Allocation in a Swarm of Foraging Robots: An Approach Based on Response Threshold Sigmoid Model

  • Bao Pang
  • Yong SongEmail author
  • Chengjin Zhang
  • Hongling Wang
  • Runtao Yang
Regular Papers Robot and Applications


This paper proposes a task allocation model to adjust the number of working robots autonomously in a swarm of foraging robots. In swarm foraging, the traffic congestion in foraging area and the physical interference between robots can decrease the swarm performance significantly. We introduce the concept of traffic flow density for the first time which can be used to reflect the traffic condition in the foraging area. The amount of obstacle avoidance denotes the number of times physical interference generated in swarm foraging. The traffic flow density and the amount of obstacle avoidance together adjust the value of the threshold. In the proposed response threshold sigmoid model (RTSM), the individual robot can determine autonomously whether to forage or not on the basis of the threshold and the external stimulus and the swarm system can complete the expected foraging task. Simulation experiments are carried out with the aim of evaluating the performance of the proposed method. Several performance measures are introduced to analyze the experimental results and compare to adaptive response threshold model (ARTM). Experimental results verify that the RTSM improves foraging efficiency and decreases the physical interference.


Foraging physical interference self-organized swarm robotics task allocation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    D. M. Gordon, “The organization of work in social insect colonies,” Nature, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 121–124, March 1996.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    S. C. Chu, J. F. Roddick, and J. S. Pan, “Ant colony system with communication strategies,” Information Sciences, vol. 167, no. 1, pp. 63–67, December 2004.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    D. M. Gordon, “Interaction patterns and task allocation in ant colonies,” Springer Science & Business Media, pp. 51–67, 1999.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    M. Dorigo, D. Floreano, L. M. Gambardella, F. Mondada, S. Nolfi, and T. Baaboura, “Swarmanoid: a novel concept for the study of heterogeneous robotic swarms,” IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 60–71, September 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    L. Bayındır, “A review of swarm robotics tasks,” Neurocomputing, vol. 172, pp. 292–321, January 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    H. Hamann and H. Rn, “An analytical and spatial model of foraging in a swarm of robots,” Swarm Robotics, Second International Workshop, pp. 43–55, 2006.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    O. Zedadra, H. Seridi, N. Jouandeau, and G. Fortino, “A cooperative switching algorithm for multi-agent foraging,” Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, vol. 50, pp. 302–319, April 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    A. Schroeder, S. Ramakrishnan, M. Kumar, and B. Trease, “Efficient spatial coverage by a robot swarm based on an ant foraging model and the Lévy distribution,” Swarm Intelligence, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 39–69, February 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    L. Pitonakova, R. Crowder, and S. Bullock, “Information flow principles for plasticity in foraging robot swarms,” Swarm Intelligence, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1–31, February 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    H. Jung, Y. Kim, and H. K. Dong, “Visual cooperation based on LOS for self-organization of swarm robots,” International Journal of Control, Automation and Systems, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 216–224, February 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    D. A. Lima and G. M. Oliveira, “A cellular automata ant memory model of foraging in a swarm of robots,” Applied Mathematical Modelling, vol. 47, pp. 551–572, July 2017.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    W. S. Moon, J. W. Jang, H. S. Kim, and K. R. Baek, “Virtual pheromone map building and a utilization method for a multi-purpose swarm robot system,” International Journal of Control, Automation and Systems, vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 1446–1453, December 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    S. Garnier, F. Tache, M. Combe, and A. Grimal, “Alice in pheromone land: an experimental setup for the study of ant-like robots,” IEEE Swarm Intelligence Symposium, pp. 37–44, April 2007.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    E. Bonabeau, G. Theraulaz, and J. L. Deneubourg, “Fixed response thresholds and the regulation of division of labor in insect societies,” Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 753–807, July 1998.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Y. Yang, X. Chen, Q. Li, and Y. Tian, “Swarm robots task allocation based on local communication,” International Conference on Computer, Mechatronics, Control and Electronic Engineering, pp. 415–418, 2010.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    E. Castello, T. Yamamoto, Y. Nakamura, and H. Ishiguro, “Foraging optimization in swarm robotic systems based on an adaptive response threshold model,” Advanced Robotics, vol. 28, no. 20, pp. 1343–1356, June 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    T. H. Labella, M. Dorigo, and J. L. Deneubourg, “Division of labor in a group of robots inspired by ants’ foraging behavior,” Acm Transactions on Autonomous & Adaptive Systems, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 4–25, September 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    E. Castello, T. Yamamoto, Y. Nakamura, and H. Ishiguro, “Task allocation for a robotic swarm based on an adaptive response threshold model,” Proc. of 13th International Conference on Control, Automation and Systems (ICCAS), IEEE, Gwangju, pp. 259–266, 2013.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    W. Lee and D. Kim, “Adaptive division of labor in multirobot system with minimum task switching,” Artificial Life 14: International Conference on the Synthesis and Simulation of Living Systems, pp. 750–756, 2014.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    J. D. Lope, D. Maravall, and Y. Qui, “Self-organizing techniques to improve the decentralized multi-task distribution in multi-robot systems,” Neurocomputing, vol. 163, pp. 47–55, April 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    E. Castello, T. Yamamoto, F. D. Libera, W. Liu, A. F. T. Winfield, Y. Nakamura, and H. Ishiguro, “Adaptive foraging for simulated and real robotic swarms: the dynamical response threshold approach,” Swarm Intelligence, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1–31, January 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    K. Lerman and A. Galstyan, “Mathematical model of foraging in a group of robots: effect of interference,” Autonomous Robots, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 127–141, September 2002.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    Y. Khaluf, M. Birattari, and F. Rammig, “Analysis of long-term swarm performance based on short-term experiments,” Soft Computing, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 37–48, January 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    G. Pini, A. Brutschy, C. Pinciroli, M. Dorigo, and M. Birattari, “Autonomous task partitioning in robot foraging: an approach based on cost estimation,” Adaptive behavior, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 118–136, April 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    G. Pini, A. Brutschy, A. Scheidler, M. Dorigo, and M. Birattari, “Task partitioning in a robot swarm: object retrieval as a sequence of subtasks with direct object transfer,” Artificial Life, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 291–317, August 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    A. Lein and R. T. Vaughan, “Adaptive multi-robot bucket brigade foraging,” Artificial Life, vol. 6, PP. 337–342, January 2008.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    W. Liu, A. F. T. Winfield, J. Sa, J. Chen, and L. Dou, “Towards energy optimization: emergent task allocation in a swarm of foraging robots,” Adaptive behavior, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 289–305, September 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. [28]
    C. Pinciroli, V. Trianni, R. O’Grady, G. Pini, A. Brutschy, M. Brambilla, N. Mathews, E. Ferrante, G. D. Caro, F. Ducatelle, M. Birattari, L. M. Gambardella, and M. Dorigo, “ARGoS: a modular, parallel, multi-engine simulator for multi-robot systems,” Swarm Intelligence, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 271–295, November 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. [29]
    M. Bonani, V. Longchamp, S. Magnenat, P. Retornaz, D. Burnier, G. Roulet, F. Vaussard, H. Bleuler and F. Mondada, “The marXbot, a miniature mobile robot opening new perspectives for the collective-robotic research,” Proc. of IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 4187–4193, 2010.Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    J. Qiu, T. Wang, S. Yin, and H. Gao, “Data-based optimal control for networked double-layer industrial processes,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 64, no. 5, pp. 4179–4168, May 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. [31]
    J. Qiu, Y.Wei, H. R. Karimi, and H. Gao, “Reliable control of discrete-time piecewise-affine time-delay systems via output feedback,” IEEE Transactions on Reliability, vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 79–91, March 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ICROS, KIEE and Springer 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Control Science and EngineeringShandong UniversityJinanChina
  2. 2.School of Mechanical, Electrical and Information EngineeringShandong University at WeihaiWeihaiChina

Personalised recommendations