Synchronization and Gait Adaptation in Evolving Hexapod Robots

  • Mariagiovanna Mazzapioda
  • Stefano Nolfi
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4095)


In this paper we present a distributed control architecture for a simulated hexapod robot with twelve degrees of freedom consisting of six homogeneous neural modules controlling the six corresponding legs that only have access to local sensory information and that coordinate by exchanging signals that diffuse in space like gaseous neuro-trasmitters. The free parameters of the neural modules are evolved and are selected on the basis of the distance travelled by the robot. Obtained results indicate how the six neural controllers are able to coordinate so to produce an effective walking behaviour and to adapt on the fly by selecting the gait that is most appropriate to the current robot/environmental circumstances. The analysis of the evolved neural controllers indicates that the six neural controllers synchronize and converge on an appropriate gait on the basis of extremely simple control mechanisms and that the effects of the physical interaction with the environment are exploited to coordinate and to converge on a tripod or tetrapod gait on the basis of the current circumstances.


Additional Weight Neural Controller Distribute Control System Modular Robot Evolutionary Robotic 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Gallagher, J., Beer, D.R., Espenschied, K., Quinn, R.D.: Application of evolved locomotion controllers to a hexapod robot. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 19, 95–103 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ijspeert, A.J., Crespi, A., Cabelguen, J.M.: Simulation and robotics studies of salamander locomotion. Applying neurobiological principles to the control of locomotion in robots. Neuroinformatics 3(3), 171–196 (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hulse, M., Wischmann, S., Pasemann, F.: Structure and function of evolved neuro-controllers for autonomous robots. Connection Science 16(4), 249–266 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nolfi, S., Floroeano, D.: Evolutionary Robotics: The Biology, Intelligence, and Technology of Self-Organizing Machines. MIT Press/Bradford Books (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kamimura, A., Murata, S., Yoshida, E., Kurokawa, H., Tomita, K., Kokaji, S.: Self-reconfigurable modular robot - experiments on reconfiguration and locomotion. In: Tarn, T.J., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. IEEE Press, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yim, M., Zhang, Y., Duff, D.: Modular robots. IEEE Spectrum, 30–34 (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sims, K.: Evolving 3D morphology and behavior by competition. In: Brooks, R., Maes, P. (eds.) Proceedings of Fourth Conference on Artificial Life. MIT Press, Cambridge (1994)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bongard, J., Pfeifer, R.: Evolving complete agents using artificial ontogeny. In: Hara, F., Pfeifer, R. (eds.) iMorpho-functional Machines: The New Species: Designing Embodied Intelligence. Springer, Berlin (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hornby, G.S., Pollack, J.B.: Creating high-level components with a generative representation for body-brain evolution. Artificial Life 8(3), 223–246 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bianco, R., Nolfi, S.: Toward open-ended evolutionary robotics: evolving elementary robotic units able to self-assemble and self-reproduce. Connection Science 4, 227–248 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mazzapioda, M., Nolfi, S.: Synchronization whitin Homogeneous Neural Modules Controlling a Simulated Hexapod Robot. In: Proceedings in AlifeX (in press, 2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Elphick, M.R., Kemenes, G., Staras, K., O’Shea, M.: Behavioural role for nitric oxide in chemosensory activation of feeding in a mollusc. Journal of Neuroscience 15(11), 7653–7664 (1995)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Elphick, M.R., Williams, L., O’Shea, M.: New Features of the locust optic lobe:evidence of a role for nitric oxide in insect vision. Journal of Experimental Biology 199, 2395–2407 (1996)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Husbands, P., Philippides, A., Smith, T.M.C., O’Shea, M.: Volume Signalling in Real and Robot Nervous Systems. Theory in Biosciences 120, 253–269 (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mariagiovanna Mazzapioda
    • 1
  • Stefano Nolfi
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Cognitive Sciences and TechnologiesNational Research Council (CNR)RomeItaly

Personalised recommendations