Task Allocation of Multi-Robot Systems Based on a Novel Explosive Immune Evolutionary Algorithm

Article Preview

Abstract:

To solve the task allocation of multi-robot systems, a novel explosive evolution - based immune genetic algorithm (EIGA) is presented. On the basis of the immune genetic algorithm (IGA), the population number of EIGA is increased quickly through explosive evolutionary mode, and then the better individuals are selected through the comparison of allelic genes, which can improve the population quality with the premise of ensuring the population diversity, and enhance the search speed and search precision of EIGA. Compared with the IGA and genetic algorithm (GA), the simulation results indicate that the proposed EIGA is characterized by quick convergence speed, high optimization precision and good stability, and the tasks are allocated rationally and scientifi-cally which realizes the task cooperation of multi-robot systems well.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Info:

Periodical:

Pages:

331-335

Citation:

Online since:

December 2012

Export:

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Permissions PLS:

Сopyright:

© 2013 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

[1] Dong YB, Jiang JP, He Y (2007) Fitness-based task allocation strategy for multi-robot system. Journal of Zhejiang University (Engineering Science) 41(2): 272-277.

Google Scholar

[2] Gao YY, Wei W(2006) Multi-robot self-determination cooperation based on immune network in an unknown environmen. Journal of Zhejiang University(Engineering Science) 40(5): 733-737.

Google Scholar

[3] Huan WN, Gong JW, Wang PH (2006) Multi-robot Task AllocationM ethod Based on GA. Computer Simulation 23(11): 164-167.

Google Scholar

[4] Jiao CH, Wang KR (2010) Cognitive radio decision engine based on immune genetic algorithm. 32(5): 1083-1087.

Google Scholar

[5] Zong H, Zhang K, Sen F (2010) Cambrian explosion. 6: 26-28.

Google Scholar

[6] Chen PY, Wang DW (2004) Improved Genetic Algorithm for Solving Winner Determination in Combinatorial Auctions. 25(4): 349-351.

Google Scholar