Evolution of generative design systems for modular physical robots

Recent research has demonstrated the ability for automatic design of the morphology and control of real physical robots using techniques inspired by biological evolution. The main criticism of the evolutionary design approach, however, is that it is doubtful whether it will reach the high complexities necessary for practical engineering. Here we claim that for automatic design systems to scale in complexity the designs they produce must be made of re-used modules. Our approach is based on the use of a generative design grammar subject to an evolutionary process. Unlike a direct encoding of a design, a generative design specification can re-use components, giving it the ability to create more complex modules from simpler ones. Re-used modules are also valuable for improved efficiency in testing and construction. We describe a system for creating generative specifications capable of hierarchical modularity by combining Lindenmayer systems with evolutionary algorithms. Using this system we demonstrate for the first time a generative system for physical, modular, 2D locomoting robots and their controllers.

[1]  A. Lindenmayer Mathematical models for cellular interactions in development. II. Simple and branching filaments with two-sided inputs. , 1968, Journal of theoretical biology.

[2]  A. Lindenmayer Mathematical models for cellular interactions in development. I. Filaments with one-sided inputs. , 1968, Journal of theoretical biology.

[3]  John H. Holland,et al.  Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence , 1992 .

[4]  Thomas Bäck,et al.  A Survey of Evolution Strategies , 1991, ICGA.

[5]  Karl Sims,et al.  Evolving 3d morphology and behavior by competition , 1994 .

[6]  Peter John Bentley,et al.  Generic evolutionary design of solid objects using a genetic algorithm , 2007 .

[7]  Phil Husbands,et al.  Two Applications of Genetic Algorithms to Component Design , 1996, Evolutionary Computing, AISB Workshop.

[8]  Marc Schoenauer,et al.  Shape Representations and Evolution Schemes , 1996, Evolutionary Programming.

[9]  Gabriela Ochoa,et al.  On Genetic Algorithms and Lindenmayer Systems , 1998, PPSN.

[10]  Jordan B. Pollack,et al.  Computer Evolution of Buildable Objects for Evolutionary Design by Computers , 1998 .

[11]  Peter J. Bentley,et al.  Evolutionary Design By Computers , 1999 .

[12]  Helen Jackson,et al.  Exploring Three-dimensional design worlds using Lindenmeyer systems and Genetic Programming , 1999 .

[13]  Peter J. Bentley,et al.  Three Ways to Grow Designs: A Comparison of Evolved Embryogenies for a Design Problem , 1999 .

[14]  John S. McCaskill,et al.  From Directed to Open-Ended Evolution in a Complex Simulation Model , 2000 .

[15]  Maciej Komosinski,et al.  From Directed to Open-Ended Evolution in a Complex Simulation Model , 2000 .

[16]  Gregory S. Hornby,et al.  The advantages of generative grammatical encodings for physical design , 2001, Proceedings of the 2001 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (IEEE Cat. No.01TH8546).

[17]  W. Oechel,et al.  Automatic design and manufacture of robotic lifeforms , 2022 .