To add with caution — decreasing a swarm robotics' efficiency by imprudently enhancing the robots' capabilities

This work discusses the common opinion among robotic systems' designers, speculating that given a robotic system designed for efficiently handling a given assignment, enhancing this system by increasing the physical capabilities of the robots may only result in an improvement in the overall performance of the system. Namely, a robotic systems designer may be allowed to freely use existing designs as a basis for new systems, by merely enhancing the robots' resources and capabilities, until finally the required performance will be achieved. This work argues that this assumption is incorrect and should be avoided, as it may result in systems comprised of advanced and expensive robots, which achieve far inferior performance than the original systems used as the basis of their designs. The work presents an example concerning the problem of multi-robots exploration of a graph, in which adding communication features to the robots causes the entire system's performance to drop significantly.

[1]  Marios M. Polycarpou,et al.  A cooperative search framework for distributed agents , 2001, Proceeding of the 2001 IEEE International Symposium on Intelligent Control (ISIC '01) (Cat. No.01CH37206).

[2]  Huosheng Hu,et al.  Coordination in multi-agent RoboCup teams , 2001, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[3]  Sven Koenig,et al.  Terrain coverage with ant robots: a simulation study , 2001, AGENTS '01.

[4]  L. Stone Theory of Optimal Search , 1975 .

[5]  Ronald C. Arkin,et al.  Integrating behavioral, perceptual, and world knowledge in reactive navigation , 1990, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[6]  Shin'ichi Yuta,et al.  Consideration on the cooperation of multiple autonomous mobile robots , 1990, EEE International Workshop on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Towards a New Frontier of Applications.

[7]  Rachid Alami,et al.  Multi-robot cooperation in the MARTHA project , 1998, IEEE Robotics Autom. Mag..

[8]  Ronald C. Arkin,et al.  Multiagent Mission Specification and Execution , 1997, Auton. Robots.

[9]  Marios M. Polycarpou,et al.  Cooperative Control for Autonomous Air Vehicles , 2002 .

[10]  A. WagnerIsrael,et al.  From Ants to A(ge)nts , 2001 .

[11]  Maja J. Matarić,et al.  Designing emergent behaviors: from local interactions to collective intelligence , 1993 .

[12]  Sandip Sen,et al.  Evolving Beharioral Strategies in Predators and Prey , 1995, Adaption and Learning in Multi-Agent Systems.

[13]  Luc Steels,et al.  Cooperation between distributed agents through self-organisation , 1990, EEE International Workshop on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Towards a New Frontier of Applications.

[14]  Charles D. Schaper,et al.  Communications, Computation, Control, and Signal Processing: A Tribute to Thomas Kailath , 1997 .

[15]  Michael P. Wellman Market-aware agents for a multiagent world , 1997, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[16]  Steve Chien,et al.  A comparison of coordinated planning methods for cooperating rovers , 1999 .

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

[18]  Jun Ota,et al.  Motion planning for cooperative transportation of a large object by multiple mobile robots in a 3D environment , 2000, Proceedings 2000 ICRA. Millennium Conference. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. Symposia Proceedings (Cat. No.00CH37065).

[19]  Tucker R. Balch,et al.  Behavior-based formation control for multirobot teams , 1998, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[20]  Maja J. Mataric,et al.  Interaction and intelligent behavior , 1994 .

[21]  B. O. Koopman The Theory of Search. II. Target Detection , 1956 .

[22]  Maja J. Matarić,et al.  Sold!: Market methods for multi-robot control , 2001 .

[23]  Martial Hebert,et al.  Distributed robotic mapping of extreme environments , 2001, SPIE Optics East.