A Study of Scalability Properties in Robotic Teams

In this chapter we describe how the productivity of homogeneous robots scales with group size. Economists found that the addition of workers into a group results in their contributing progressively less productivity; a concept called the Law of Marginal Returns. We study groups that differ in their coordination algorithms, and note that they display increasing marginal returns only until a certain group size. After this point the groups’ productivity drops with the addition of robots. Interestingly, the group size where this phenomenon occurs varies between groups using differing coordination methods. We define a measure of interference that enables comparison, and find a high negative correlation between interference and productivity within these groups. Effective coordination algorithms maintain increasing productivity over larger groups by reducing the team’s interference levels. Using this result we are able to examine the productivity of robotic groups in several simulated domains in thousands of trials. We find that in theory groups should always add productivity during size scale-up, but spatial limitations within domains cause robots to fail to achieve this ideal. We believe that coordination methods can be developed that improve a group’s performance by minimizing interference. We present our findings of composite coordination methods that provide evidence of this claim.

[1]  Gianfranco Lamperti,et al.  Diagnosis of Large Active Systems , 1999, Artif. Intell..

[2]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  Emergent Cooperative Goal-Satisfaction in Large Scale Automated-Agent Systems , 1999, Artif. Intell..

[3]  Maja J. Matarić,et al.  A General, Local Algorithm for Robot Formations , 2001 .

[4]  Tucker Balch,et al.  Reward and Diversity in Multirobot Foraging , 1999, IJCAI 1999.

[5]  Milind Tambe,et al.  Towards Flexible Teamwork , 1997, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[6]  Michael R. M. Jenkin,et al.  A taxonomy for multi-agent robotics , 1996, Auton. Robots.

[7]  Craig W. Reynolds Flocks, herds, and schools: a distributed behavioral model , 1998 .

[8]  Ronald C. Arkin,et al.  Cooperative multiagent robotic systems , 1998 .

[9]  Bernhard Nebel,et al.  Dynamic decentralized area partitioning for cooperating cleaning robots , 2002, Proceedings 2002 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No.02CH37292).

[10]  Maria Gini,et al.  Performance Evaluation of Multiple Robots in a Search and Retrieval Task , 1998 .

[11]  Lynne E. Parker,et al.  ALLIANCE: an architecture for fault tolerant multirobot cooperation , 1998, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[12]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Controlling Cooperative Problem Solving in Industrial Multi-Agent Systems Using Joint Intentions , 1995, Artif. Intell..

[13]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  Negotiation and Cooperation in Multi-Agent Environments , 1997, Artif. Intell..

[14]  Gaurav S. Sukhatme,et al.  Emergent bucket brigading: a simple mechanisms for improving performance in multi-robot constrained-space foraging tasks , 2001, AGENTS '01.

[15]  Yang Xu,et al.  Scaling teamwork to very large teams , 2004, Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 2004. AAMAS 2004..

[16]  Pattie Maes,et al.  A Study of Territoriality: The Role of Critical Mass in Adaptive Task Division , 1996 .

[17]  Yaser Al-Onaizan,et al.  On being a teammate: experiences acquired in the design of RoboCup teams , 1999, AGENTS '99.

[18]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  Adaptive Robot Coordination Using Interference Metrics , 2004, ECAI.

[19]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  Collaborative Plans for Complex Group Action , 1996, Artif. Intell..

[20]  Dani Goldberg Design and Evaluation of Robust Behavior-Based Controllers for Distributed Multi-Robot Collection Tasks , 2001 .

[21]  Hong Zhang,et al.  Collective robot intelligence , 1993 .

[22]  Maja J. Mataric,et al.  A general algorithm for robot formations using local sensing and minimal communication , 2002, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[23]  Claus Ronald. Kube,et al.  Collective robotic intelligence , 1992 .

[24]  Lynne E. Parker,et al.  Robot Teams: From Diversity to Polymorphism , 2002 .

[25]  Gaurav S. Sukhatme,et al.  Go ahead, make my day: Robot conflict resolution by aggressive competition , 2000 .

[26]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  PHA*: performing A* in unknown physical environments , 2002, AAMAS '02.

[27]  Pedro V. Sander,et al.  A scalable, distributed algorithm for efficient task allocation , 2002, AAMAS '02.

[28]  Maja J. Mataric,et al.  Adaptive division of labor in large-scale minimalist multi-robot systems , 2003, Proceedings 2003 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2003) (Cat. No.03CH37453).

[29]  Bernhard Nebel,et al.  Decentralized collision avoidance, deadlock detection, and deadlock resolution for multiple mobile robots , 2001, Proceedings 2001 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. Expanding the Societal Role of Robotics in the the Next Millennium (Cat. No.01CH37180).

[30]  Maja J. Mataric,et al.  Interference as a Tool for Designing and Evaluating Multi-Robot Controllers , 1997, AAAI/IAAI.

[31]  Stanley L. Brue Retrospectives The Law of Diminishing Returns , 1993 .