Autonomous Robots

, Volume 16, Issue 3, pp 313–332 | Cite as

Building Terrain-Covering Ant Robots: A Feasibility Study

  • Jonas Svennebring
  • Sven Koenig
Article

Abstract

Robotics researchers have studied robots that can follow trails laid by other robots. We, on the other hand, study robots that leave trails in the terrain to cover closed terrain repeatedly. How to design such ant robots has so far been studied only theoretically for gross robot simplifications. In this article, we describe for the first time how to build physical ant robots that cover terrain and test their design both in realistic simulation environments and on a Pebbles III robot. We show that the coverage behavior of our ant robots can be modeled with a modified version of node counting, a real-time search method. We then report on first experiments that we performed to understand their efficiency and robustness in situations where some ant robots fail, they are moved without realizing this, the trails are of uneven quality, and some trails are destroyed. Finally, we report the results of a large-scale simulation experiment where ten ant robots covered a factory floor of 25 by 25 meters repeatedly over 85 hours without getting stuck.

ant robotics mobile robotics pheromone trails real-time search robot hardware terrain coverage 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adler, F. and Gordon D. 1992. Information collection and spread by networks of patrolling ants. The American Naturalist, 140(3):373-400.Google Scholar
  2. Aleliunas, R., Karp, R., Lipton, R., Lovasz, L., and Rackoff, C. 1979. Random walks, universal traversal sequences, and the complexity of maze problems. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 218-223.Google Scholar
  3. Arkin, R. 1989. Motor-schema based mobile robot navigation. International Journal of Robotics Research, 8(4):92-112.Google Scholar
  4. Arkin, R. 1998. Behavior-Based Robotics. MIT Press.Google Scholar
  5. Balch, T. and Arkin, R. 1993. Avoiding the past: A simple, but effective strategy for reactive navigation. In International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 678-685.Google Scholar
  6. Balch, T., Khan, Z., and Veloso, M. 2001. Automatically tracking and analyzing the behavior of live insect colonies. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomous Agents, pp. 521-528.Google Scholar
  7. Balch, T. and Ram, A. 1998. Integrating robotics research with JavaBots. In Proceedings of the AAAI Spring Symposium.Google Scholar
  8. Batalin, M. and Sukhatme, G. 2003. Efficient exploration without localization. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Robotics and Automation, (in press).Google Scholar
  9. Blum, M. and Kozen, D. 1978. On the power of the compass, or, why mazes are easier to search than graphs. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 132-142.Google Scholar
  10. Blum, M. and Sakoda,W. 1977. On the capability of finite automata in 2 and 3 dimensional space. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 147-161.Google Scholar
  11. Borenstein, J., Everett, B., and Feng, L. 1996. Navigating Mobile Robots: Systems and Techniques. Peters.Google Scholar
  12. Braitenberg, V. 1984. Vehicles. MIT Press.Google Scholar
  13. Choset, H. 2001. Coverage for robotics-a survey of recent results. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 31:113-126.Google Scholar
  14. Deng, X. and Mirzaian, A. 1996. Competitive robot mapping with homogeneous markers. In IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 12(4):532-542.Google Scholar
  15. Dudek, G., Jenkin, M., Milios, E., and Wilkes D. 1991. Robotic exploration as graph construction. In IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 7(6):859-865.Google Scholar
  16. Hedberg, S. 1995. Robots cleaning up hazardous waste. AI Expert, 5(5):20-24.Google Scholar
  17. Huang,W. 2001. Optimal line-sweep-based decompositions for coverage algorithms. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 27-32.Google Scholar
  18. Ishida, T. 1997. Real-Time Search for Learning Autonomous Agents. Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  19. Koenig, S. 2001. Agent-centered search. Artificial Intelligence Magazine, 22(4):109-131.Google Scholar
  20. Koenig, S., Blum, A., Ishida, T., and Korf, R. (Eds.) 1997. In Proceedings of the AAAI-97 Workshop on On-Line Search. AAAI Press, Available as AAAI Technical Report WS-97-10.Google Scholar
  21. Koenig, S. and Simmons. R.G. 1998. Xavier: A robot navigation architecture based on partially observable Markov decision process models. In Artificial Intelligence Based Mobile Robotics: Case Studies of Successful Robot Systems, D. Kortenkamp, R. Bonasso, and R. Murphy, (Eds.) MIT Press, pp. 91-122.Google Scholar
  22. Koenig S. and Szymanski, B. 1999. Value-update rules for real-time search. In Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 718-724.Google Scholar
  23. Koenig, S., Szymanski, B. and Liu, Y. 2001. Efficient and inefficient ant coverage methods. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 31:41-76.Google Scholar
  24. Korf, R. 1990. Real-time heuristic search. Artificial Intelligence, 42(2-3):189-211.Google Scholar
  25. Lambrinos, D., Möller, R., Labhart, R., Pfeifer, R. and Wehner, R. 2000. A mobile robot employing insect strategies for navigation. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 30:39-64.Google Scholar
  26. Payton, D., Daily, M., Estowski, R., Howard, M. and Lee, C. 2001. Pheromone robotics. Autonomous Robots, 11(3):319-324.Google Scholar
  27. Pirzadeh, A. and Snyder,W. 1990. Aunified solution to coverage and search in explored and unexplored terrains using indirect control. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 2113-2119.Google Scholar
  28. Russell, R. 1997. Heat trails as short-lived navigational markers for mobile robots. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 3534-3539.Google Scholar
  29. Russell, R. 1999. Ant trails-an example for robots to follow? In Proceedings of the International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 2698-2703.Google Scholar
  30. Russell, R. 1999. Odour Sensing for Mobile Robots.World Scientific.Google Scholar
  31. Russell, R., Thiel, D., and Mackay-Sim, A. 1994. Sensing odour trails for mobile robot navigation. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 2672-2677.Google Scholar
  32. Sharpe, R. and Webb, B. 1998. Simulated and situated models of chemical trail following in ants. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior, pp. 195-204.Google Scholar
  33. Thrun, S. 1992. Efficient exploration in reinforcement learning. Technical Report CMU-CS-92-102, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh (Pennsylvania).Google Scholar
  34. Thrun, S. 2000. Probabilistic algorithms in robotics. Artificial Intelligence Magazine, 21(4):93-109.Google Scholar
  35. Vaughan, R., Stoy, K., Sukhatme, G., and Mataric, M. 2002. LOST: Localization-space trails for robot teams. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 18(5):796-812.Google Scholar
  36. Wagner, I. and Bruckstein, A. 1997. Cooperative cleaners-a study in ant robotics. In Communications, Computation, Control, and Signal Processing: A Tribute to Thomas Kailath, A. Paulraj, V. Roychowdhury, and C. Schaper (Eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 289-308.Google Scholar
  37. Wagner, I., Lindenbaum, M., and Bruckstein, A. 1996. Smell as a computational resource-a lesson we can learn from the ant. In Proceedings of the Israeli Symposium on Theory of Computing and Systems.Google Scholar
  38. Wagner, I., Lindenbaum, M., and Bruckstein, A. 1997. On-line graph searching by a smell-oriented vertex process. In Proceedings of the AAAIWorkshop on On-Line Search, S. Koenig, A. Blum, T. Ishida, and R. Korf (Eds.), pp. 122-125. Available as AAAI Technical Report WS-97-10.Google Scholar
  39. Wagner, I., Lindenbaum, M., and Bruckstein. A. 1998. Efficiently searching a dynamic graph by a smell-oriented vertex process. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 24:211-223.Google Scholar
  40. Wagner, I., Lindenbaum, M., and Bruckstein, A. 1999. Distributed covering by ant-robots using evaporating traces. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 15(5):918-933.Google Scholar
  41. Wagner, I., Lindenbaum, M., and Bruckstein, A. 2000. MAC vs. PC: Determinism and randomness as complementary approaches to robotic exploration of continuous unknown domains. International Journal of Robotics Research, 19(1):12-31.Google Scholar
  42. Yaguchi, H. 1996. Robots introduction to cleaning work in the east japan railway company. Advanced Robotics, 10(4):403-414.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jonas Svennebring
  • Sven Koenig

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations