Ant-like task allocation and recruitment in cooperative robots

One of the greatest challenges in robotics is to create machines that are able to interact with unpredictable environments in real time. A possible solution may be to use swarms of robots behaving in a self-organized manner, similar to workers in an ant colony. Efficient mechanisms of division of labour, in particular series–parallel operation and transfer of information among group members, are key components of the tremendous ecological success of ants. Here we show that the general principles regulating division of labour in ant colonies indeed allow the design of flexible, robust and effective robotic systems. Groups of robots using ant-inspired algorithms of decentralized control techniques foraged more efficiently and maintained higher levels of group energy than single robots. But the benefits of group living decreased in larger groups, most probably because of interference during foraging. Intriguingly, a similar relationship between group size and efficiency has been documented in social insects. Moreover, when food items were clustered, groups where robots could recruit other robots in an ant-like manner were more efficient than groups without information transfer, suggesting that group dynamics of swarms of robots may follow rules similar to those governing social insects.

[1]  M. Winston,et al.  Insect societies and the molecular biology of social behavior , 1997, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.

[2]  Andrew B. Kahng,et al.  Cooperative Mobile Robotics: Antecedents and Directions , 1997, Auton. Robots.

[3]  Jean-Louis Deneubourg,et al.  Information Processing in Social Insects , 1999, Birkhäuser Basel.

[4]  Hong Zhang,et al.  Collective Robotics: From Social Insects to Robots , 1993, Adapt. Behav..

[5]  E. Wilson,et al.  Caste and ecology in the social insects. , 1979, Monographs in population biology.

[6]  Marco Dorigo,et al.  Swarm intelligence: from natural to artificial systems , 1999 .

[7]  F. Ratnieks,et al.  Task Partitioning in Insect Societies. I. Effect of Colony Size on Queueing Delay and Colony Ergonomic Efficiency , 1999, The American Naturalist.

[8]  Walter R. Tschinkel,et al.  Sociometry and Sociogenesis of Colonies of the Fire Ant Solenopsis Invicta During One Annual Cycle , 1993 .

[9]  G. Robinson Regulation of division of labor in insect societies. , 1992, Annual review of entomology.

[10]  T. Seeley The Wisdom of the Hive: The Social Physiology of Honey Bee Colonies , 1995 .

[11]  Jean-Arcady Meyer,et al.  From Animals to Animats: Proceedings of The First International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior (Complex Adaptive Systems) , 1990 .

[12]  E. Bonabeau,et al.  Quantitative study of the fixed threshold model for the regulation of division of labour in insect societies , 1996, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[13]  D. Gordon,et al.  What is the function of encounter patterns in ant colonies? , 1993, Animal Behaviour.

[14]  F. Ratnieks,et al.  Task partitioning in insect societies , 1999, Insectes Sociaux.

[15]  E. Wilson The Insect Societies , 1974 .

[16]  Edward O. Wilson,et al.  Success and Dominance in Ecosystems: The Case of the Social Insects , 1991 .

[17]  Liselotte Sundström,et al.  Sex Allocation and Colony Maintenance in Monogyne and Polygyne Colonies of Formica truncorum (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): The Impact of Kinship and Mating Structure , 1995 .

[18]  M. M�glich,et al.  Tandem Calling: A New Kind of Signal in Ant Communication , 1974, Science.

[19]  Thomas D. Seeley,et al.  Honey Bee Colonies are Group‐Level Adaptive Units , 1997, The American Naturalist.

[20]  Erik V. Nordheim,et al.  Productivity in a social wasp: per capita output increases with swarm size , 1996 .