Emergent Behavior Control Patterns in Robotic Collectives

  • Razvan-Dorel Cioarga
  • Mihai V. Micea
  • Vladimir Cretu
  • Daniel Racoceanu
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5928)


This paper focuses on the implementation and evaluation of a set of integrated models for the representation of emergent behavior control patterns in robotic environments. The models have been validated on a custom developed emergent behavior simulator and tested using the CORE-TX (COllaborative Robotic Environment - the Timisoara eXperiment) prototype platform. Four metrics (pheromone intensity, path affinity, reachability and liveness) are introduced and used to evaluate the performance of the proposed control patterns. Experimental results for an environment which employs ant colony behavior patterns in obstacle avoidance applications show that the emergent behavior of the robotic collective is triggered by a number ranging from 9 to 11 entities. The results are also consistent with the theoretical model-based predictions. When doubling the number of entities, the performance of the system can be further increased by 19.3%. On the other hand, a high concentration of entities has been noted to affect the emergent behavior of the system and, thus, its performance, mainly due to the interaction overhead. An upper bound to the number of individuals has been computed, based on a set of parameters which model each particular application. The experimental validation of the proposed behavior control patterns endorses them as a good framework for the analysis and development of complex applications which require collaborative and distributed intelligence, perception and operation.


Short Path Obstacle Avoidance Longe Path Emergent Behavior Prototype Platform 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Cioarga, R.D., Micea, M.V., Ciubotaru, B., Chiuciudean, D., Stanescu, D.: CORE-TX: Collective Robotic Environment - the Timisoara Experiment. In: Proc. 3-rd Romanian-Hungarian Joint Symp. on Applied Computational Intelig., SACI 2006, Timisoara, Romania, May 2006, pp. 495–506. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2006)Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    van der Zwaan, S., Marques, C.: Ant Colony Optimization for Job Shop Scheduling. In: Proc. Third Workshop on Genetic Algorithms and Artificial Life, Lisbon, Portugal (1999)Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Merkle, D., Middendorf, M., Schmeck, H.: Ant Colony Optimization for Resource-Constrained Project Scheduling. In: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, Las Vegas, Nevada, pp. 893–900 (2000)Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Iredi, S., Merkle, D., Middendorf, M.: Bi-Criterion Optimization with Multi Colony Ant Algorithms. In: Zitzler, E., Deb, K., Thiele, L., Coello Coello, C.A., Corne, D.W. (eds.) EMO 2001. LNCS, vol. 1993, p. 359. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Dorigo, M., Di Caro, G.: The ant colony optimization meta-heuristic. In: Corne, D., Dorigo, M., Glover, F. (eds.) New Ideas in Optimization, pp. 11–32. McGraw-Hill, New York (1999)Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Dorigo, M., Maniezzo, V., Colorni, A.: The Ant System: Optimization by a colony of cooperating agents. IEEE Trans. Syst, Man, Cybern. 26(2), 29–41 (1996)Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Dorigo, M., Gambardella, L.M.: Ant colony System: A Cooperative Learning Approach to the Travelling Salesman Problem. IEEE Trans. on Evolutionary Computation 1(1) (April 1997)Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Maniezzo, V., Gambardella, L.M., de Luigi, F.: Ant Colony Optimization: New Optimization Techniques in Engineering, by Onwubolu, G.C., Babu, B.V., pp. 101–117. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Van Dyke Parunak, H., Brueckner, S., Sauter, J., Matthews, R.: Global Convergence of Local Agent Behaviors. In: AAMAS 2005, Utrecht, Netherlands, July 2005, pp. 305–312 (2005)Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Truszkowski, W., Hinchey, M., Rash, J., Rouff, C.: NASA’s swarm missions: The challenge of building autonomous software. IEEE IT Professional 6(5), 47–52 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Hinchey, M., Rouff, C., Rash, J.: Requirements of an Integrated Formal Method for Intelligent Swarms. In: Proc. FMICS 2005, Lisbon, Portugal, September 2005, pp. 125–133 (2005)Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Cioarga, R., Micea, M., Ciubotaru, B., Chiciudean, D., Cretu, V., Groza, V.: eBML: A Formal Language for Behavior Modeling and Application Development in Robotic Collectives. In: Proc. International Workshop on Robotic and Sensors Environments ROSE 2007, pp. 1–6 (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Razvan-Dorel Cioarga
    • 1
  • Mihai V. Micea
    • 1
  • Vladimir Cretu
    • 1
  • Daniel Racoceanu
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer and Software Engineering (DCSE)”Politehnica” University of TimisoaraTimisoaraRomania
  2. 2.Image Perception, Access & Language (UMI CNRS 2955), International Research Unit (CNRS, NUS, I2R A*STAR, UJF), SingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations