Safe Flocking in Spite of Actuator Faults

  • Taylor Johnson
  • Sayan Mitra
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6366)

Abstract

The safe flocking problem requires a collection of N mobile agents to (a) converge to and maintain an equi-spaced lattice formation, (b) arrive at a destination, and (c) always maintain a minimum safe separation. Safe flocking in Euclidean spaces is a well-studied and difficult coordination problem. Motivated by real-world deployment of multi-agent systems, this paper studies one-dimensional safe flocking, where agents are afflicted by actuator faults. An actuator fault is a new type of failure that causes an affected agent to be stuck moving with an arbitrary velocity. In this setting, first, a self-stabilizing solution for the problem is presented. This relies on a failure detector for actuator faults. Next, it is shown that certain actuator faults cannot be detected, while others may require O(N) time for detection. Finally, a simple failure detector that achieves the latter bound is presented. Several simulation results are presented for illustrating the effects of failures on the progress towards flocking.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Arora, A., Gouda, M.: Closure and convergence: A foundation of fault-tolerant computing. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 19, 1015–1027 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chandra, T.D., Toueg, S.: Unreliable failure detectors for reliable distributed systems. J. ACM 43(2), 225–267 (1996)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chandy, K.M., Lamport, L.: Distributed snapshots: determining global states of distributed systems. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 3(1), 63–75 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dolev, S.: Self-stabilization. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)MATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fax, J., Murray, R.: Information flow and cooperative control of vehicle formations. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 49(9), 1465–1476 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Franceschelli, M., Egerstedt, M., Giua, A.: Motion probes for fault detection and recovery in networked control systems. In: American Control Conference 2008, pp. 4358–4363 (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gazi, V., Passino, K.M.: Stability of a one-dimensional discrete-time asynchronous swarm. IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern. B 35(4), 834–841 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jadbabaie, A., Lin, J., Morse, A.: Coordination of groups of mobile autonomous agents using nearest neighbor rules. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 48(6), 988–1001 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Johnson, T.: Fault-Tolerant Distributed Cyber-Physical Systems: Two Case Studies. Master’s thesis, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801 (May 2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Johnson, T., Mitra, S.: Safe and stabilizing distributed flocking in spite of actuator faults. Tech. Rep. UILU-ENG-10-2204 (CRHC-10-02), University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL (May 2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Okubo, A.: Dynamical aspects of animal grouping: Swarms, schools, flocks, and herds. Adv. Biophys. 22, 1–94 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Olfati-Saber, R.: Flocking for multi-agent dynamic systems: algorithms and theory. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 51(3), 401–420 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shaw, E.: Fish in schools. Natural History 84(8), 40–45 (1975)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tsitsiklis, J., Bertsekas, D., Athans, M.: Distributed asynchronous deterministic and stochastic gradient optimization algorithms. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 31(9), 803–812 (1986)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Taylor Johnson
    • 1
  • Sayan Mitra
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbanaUSA

Personalised recommendations