Advertisement

A multiagent system based on heterogeneous robots

  • Andreas Birk
  • Tony Belpaeme
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1456)

Abstract

The paper presents the introduction of heterogeneity into a robotic Multiagent System. The system is based on ideas from Artificial Life; it forms a kind of artificial ecosystem where the animats are linked together in their search for “food” in form of electrical energy. Within this view, different robot-types can be seen as different species. Given a basic robotic ecosystem with homogeneous agents — the so called “moles” —, the two new species “mouse” and “head” are introduced. The differences between species are quite substantial. The “moles” for example have simple sensing capabilities whereas the “mouse” is equipped with vision. Some agents do not have social capabilities, whereas “heads” depend on cooperation. The paper describes how these differences and the common dependence on a global energy source interfere, and which conceptual and technological choices have to be made to keep a kind of ecological balance.

Keywords

Charge Station Mobile Robot Adaptive Behavior Multiagent System Obstacle Avoidance 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ross Ashby. Design for a brain. Chapman and Hall; London, 1952.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hugues Bersini. Reinforcement learning for homeostatic endogenous variables. In From Animals to Animats 3. Proc. of the Third International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior. The MIT Press/Bradford Books, Cambridge, 1994.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Andreas Birk. Learning to survive. In Fifth European Workshop on Learning Robots, Bari, 1996.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bruce Blumberg. Action-selection in amsterdam: Lessons from ethology. In From Animals to Animats 3. Proc. of the Third International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior. The MIT Press/Bradford Books, Cambridge, 1994.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rodney Brooks. Intelligence without reason. In Proc. of IJCAI-91. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, 1991.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Robert Ghanea-Hercock and David P. Barnes. An evolved fuzzy reactive control system for cooperating autonomous robots. In From Animals to Animats 4. Proc. of the Fourth International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior. The MIT Press/Bradford Books, Cambridge, 1996.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ian Horswill. Characterizing adaption by constraint. In Toward a Practice of Autonomous Systems, Proceedings of the First European Conference on Artificial Life. The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1992.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    an Horswill. Polly: A vision-based artificial agent. In Proceedings of the Eleventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. AAAI, MIT Press, 1993.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Y. Kuniyoshi, M. Ishii, S. Rougeaux, N. Kita, S. Sakane, and M. Kakikura. Vision-based behaviors for multi-robots cooperation. In IEEE Int. Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 1994.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Long-Ji Lin. Self-improving reactive agents: Case studies of reinforcement learning frameworks. In From Animals to Animats. Proc. of the First International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior. The MIT Press/Bradford Books, Cambridge, 1990.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pattie Maes. A bottom-up mechanism for behavior selection in an artificial creature. In From Animals to Animats. Proc. of the First International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior. The MIT Press/Bradford Books, Cambridge, 1990.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Maja J. Mataric. Designing emergent behaviors: From local interactions to collective intelligence. In From Animals to Animats 2. Proc. of the Second International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior. The MIT Press/Bradford Books, Cambridge, 1993.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    D. McFarland and A. Houston. Quantitative Ethology: the state-space approach. Pitman Books, London, 1981.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    David McFarland. What it means for robotic behavior to be adaptive. In Jean-Arcady Meyer and Stewart W. Wilson, editors, From Animals to Animats. Proc. of the First International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior. The MIT Press/Bradford Books, Cambridge, 1991.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    David McFarland. Towards robot cooperation. In Dave Cliff, Philip Husbands, Jean-Arcady Meyer, and Stewart W. Wilson, editors, From Animals to Animats 3. Proc. of the Third International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior. The MIT Press/Bradford Books, Cambridge, 1994.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jean-Arcady Meyer and Agnes Guuillot. Simulation of adaptive behavior in animals: Review and prospect. In From Animals to Animats. Proc. of the First International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior. The MIT Press/Bradford Books, Cambridge, 1991.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Alexandros Moukas and Gillian Hayes. Synthetic robotic language acquisition by observation. In From Animals to Animats 4. Proc. of the Fourth International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior. The MIT Press/Bradford Books, Cambridge, 1996.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lynne Parker. On the design of behavior-based multi-robot teams. Advanced Robotics, 10 (6), pp. 547–578, 1996.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Luc Steels. The artificial life roots of artificial intelligence. Artificial Life Journal, Vol 1, 1, 1994.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Luc Steels. A case study in the behavior-oriented design of autonomous agents. In Dave Cliff, Philip Husbands, Jean-Arcady Meyer, and Stewart W. Wilson; editors, From Animals to Animats 3. Proc. of the Third International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior. The MIT Press/Bradford Books, Cambridge, 1994.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Luc Steels. Discovering the competitors. Journal of Adaptive Behavior 4(2), 1996.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Luc Steels. A selectionist mechanism for autonomous behavior acquisition. Journal of Robotics and Autonomous Systems 16, 1996.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Luc Steels and David McFarland. Cooperative Robots: A case Study in Animal Robotics. The MIT Press/Bradford Books, Cambridge, 1994.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Luc Steels and Paul Vogt. Grounding adaptive language games in robotic agents. In Phil Husbands and Inman Harvey, editors, 4th European Conference on Artificial Life. The MIT Press/Bradford Books, Cambridge, 1997.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Toby Tyrrell and John E. W. Mayhew. Computer simulation of an animal environment. In From Animals to Animats. Proc. of the First International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior. The MIT Press/Bradford Books, Cambridge, 1990.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Barry Brian Werger and Maja J. Mataric. Robotic “food” chains: Externalization of state and program for minimal-agent foraging. In From Animals to Animats 4. Proc. of the Fourth International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior. The MIT Press/Bradford Books, Cambridge, 1996.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gregory M. Werner. Using second order neural connections for motivation of behavioral choices. In From Animals to Animats 3. Proc. of the Third International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior. The MIT Press/Bradford Books, Cambridge, 1994.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Stewart W. Wilson. The animat path to ai. In From Animals to Animats. Proc. of the First International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior. The MIT Press/Bradford Books, Cambridge, 1991.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andreas Birk
    • 1
  • Tony Belpaeme
    • 1
  1. 1.Artificial Intelligence LaboratoryVrije Universiteit BrusselBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations