Extending Behavior-Based Systems Capabilities Using An Abstract Behavior Representation

Behavior-based systems BBS have been e ective in a variety of applications, but due to their limited use of representation (sentence or logic-like structures) they have not been used much for more complex problems involving sequences of behaviors and they have been typically constructed by hand for each task. In this paper, we present an abstract behavior representation that allows for automatically specifying behavior networks thatbehavior representation that allows for automatically specifying behavior networks that encode complex behavioral sequences, based on a given set of underlying behaviors, and avoids customized behavior redesign while accommodating the speci cs of a new task. The representation, obtained by separating behaviors into two classes, abstract and primitive, allows BBS to generate and maintain complex plan-like strategies as well as switch them at run-time, without any need for behavior redesign and/or recompilation. To validate the described representation we have performed two object delivery tasks, involving behavior con icts and various initial conditions, using a Pioneer2 DX mobile robot.

[1]  Tucker R. Balch,et al.  AuRA: principles and practice in review , 1997, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[2]  Maja J. Matari,et al.  Behavior-based Control: Examples from Navigation, Learning, and Group Behavior , 1997 .

[3]  Ian Horswill,et al.  Real-time control of attention and behavior in a logical framework , 1997, AGENTS '97.

[4]  Jana Kosecka,et al.  Application of discrete events systems for modeling and controlling robotic agents , 1994, Proceedings of the 1994 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[5]  Barry Brian Werger,et al.  Ayllu: Distributed Port-Arbitrated Behavior-Based Control , 2000 .

[6]  Michael A. Arbib,et al.  A formal model of computation for sensory-based robotics , 1989, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[7]  David Chapman,et al.  Planning for Conjunctive Goals , 1987, Artif. Intell..

[8]  Paolo Pirjanian,et al.  Behavior Coordination Mechanisms - State-of-the-art , 1999 .

[9]  Maja J. Mataric,et al.  Integration of representation into goal-driven behavior-based robots , 1992, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[10]  David Chapman,et al.  What are plans for? , 1990, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[11]  Monica N. Nicolescu,et al.  Learning Cooperation from Human-Robot Interaction , 2000, DARS.

[12]  Leslie Pack Kaelbling,et al.  Action and planning in embedded agents , 1990, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[13]  Roderic A. Grupen,et al.  A feedback control structure for on-line learning tasks , 1997, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[14]  Nils J. Nilsson,et al.  Teleo-Reactive Programs for Agent Control , 1993, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[15]  Richard Fikes,et al.  STRIPS: A New Approach to the Application of Theorem Proving to Problem Solving , 1971, IJCAI.

[16]  Pattie Maes,et al.  Situated agents can have goals , 1990, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[17]  E. Gat On Three-Layer Architectures , 1997 .