Instantaneous Actions vs. Full Asynchronicity: Controlling and Coordinating a Sset of Autonomous Mobile Robots
Over the past fewy ears, the focus of robotic design has been moving from a scenario where few, specialized (and expensive) units were used to solve a variety of tasks, to a scenario where many, general purpose (and cheap) units were used to achieve some common goal. Consequently, part of the focus has been to better understand howto e.ciently coordinate and control a set of such “simpler” mobile units. Studies can be found in di.erent disciplines, from engineering to arti.cial life: a shared feature of the majority of these studies has been the design of algorithms based on heuristics, without mainly being concerned with correctness and termination of such algorithms. Fewst udies have focused on trying to formally model an environment constituted by mobile units, studying which kind of capabilities they must have in order to achieve their goals; in other words, to study the problem from a computational point of view. This paper focuses on two of these studies [1,6,14] (the only ones, to our knowledge, that analyze the problem of coordinating and controlling a set of autonomous, mobile units from this point of view). First, their main features are described. Then, the main di.erences are highlighted, showing the relationship between the class of problems solvable in the two models.
KeywordsMobile Robots Distributed Coordination Distributed Models Computability
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.T. Balch and R. C. Arkin. Behavior-based Formation Control for Multi-robot Teams. IEEE Trans. on Robotics and Automation, 14(6), December 1998.Google Scholar
- 3.G. Beni and S. Hackwood. Coherent Swarm Motion Under Distributed Control. In Proc. DARS’92, pages 39–52, 1992.Google Scholar
- 4.Y. U. Cao, A. S. Fukunaga, A. B. Kahng, and F. Meng. Cooperative Mobile Robotics: Antecedents and Directions. In Int. Conf. on Intel. Robots and Sys., pages 226–234, 1995.Google Scholar
- 5.E. H. Durfee. Blissful Ignorance: Knowing Just Enough to Coordinate Well. In ICMAS, pages 406–413, 1995.Google Scholar
- 6.P. Flocchini, G. Prencipe, N. Santoro, and P. Widmayer. Hard Tasks for Weak Robots: The Role of Common Knowledge in Pattern Formation by Autonomous Mobile Robots. In ISAAC’ 99, pages 93–102, 1999.Google Scholar
- 7.P. Flocchini, G. Prencipe, N. Santoro, and P. Widmayer. Distributed Coordination of a Set of Autonomous Mobile Robots. In IEEE Intelligent Veichle 2000, pages 480–485, 2000.Google Scholar
- 9.Y. Kawauchi and M. Inaba and T. Fukuda. A Principle of Decision Making of Cellular Robotic System (CEBOT). In Proc. IEEE Conf. on Robotics and Autom., pages 833–838, 1993.Google Scholar
- 10.M. J. Matarić. Interaction and Intelligent Behavior. PhD thesis, MIT, May 1994.Google Scholar
- 11.S. Murata, H. Kurokawa, and S. Kokaji. Self-Assembling Machine. In Proc. IEEE Conf. on Robotics and Autom., pages 441–448, 1994.Google Scholar
- 12.L. E. Parker. On the Design of Behavior-Based Multi-Robot Teams. Journal of Advanced Robotics, 10(6), 1996.Google Scholar