Towards Cooperative Robotic Swarm Recognition: Object Classification and Validity

David King; Philip Breedon

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.450.320

Paper Titles

Surface Roughness Assessment of Micro-EDM by Wavelet Analysis Based on Goodness of Fit Test
p.304

Particle Swarm Optimization Method for Panel Layout
p.308

Machine Vision-Based Intelligent Fire Fighting Robot
p.312

Study of Car Multi-Link Rear Axle Considering Their Kinematic Incompatibilities
p.316

Towards Cooperative Robotic Swarm Recognition: Object Classification and Validity
p.320

Sliding Mode Control of a Power Screw Driven Positioning Table
p.325

A Floating and Self-Actuating Friction Drive Device for a Revolving Stage
p.329

Parametric Optimal Design of Robot End-Effector Tool for Robot-Assisted Automatic Polishing System
p.333

Mathematical Model of Manufacturing a Novel Type of Hourglass Worm with Circular Tooth Profiles
p.337

HomeKey Engineering MaterialsKey Engineering Materials Vol. 450Towards Cooperative Robotic Swarm Recognition:...

Towards Cooperative Robotic Swarm Recognition: Object Classification and Validity

Abstract:

Currently in cooperative transport research each agent can identify object validity. The validity is identified through a distinguishing feature, such as the object being lit. This paper examines the scenario where individual agents cannot assess the validity of an object. For example a triangle and hexagon may appear the same to an agent looking at a small section of the object. An arena containing half valid and half invalid objects was designed and implemented using a swarm simulation hexagonal grid test bed. The objects appear identical to an individual agent but are dissimilar, the objects were represented as imprecise triangles and hexagons. The swarm assessed each object as a group to determine its validity. Two different strategies were compared for dealing with invalid objects ranging the number of agents from 10 to 30. Initial testing has concluded that by ignoring invalid objects once identified required, on average, 1.28 times the amount of energy consumption to complete the task than when the invalid objects were removed.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Key Engineering Materials (Volume 450)

Pages:

320-324

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.450.320

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

November 2010

Authors:

David King, Philip Breedon

Keywords:

Cooperative Object Recognition, Cooperative Transport, Multi-Agent (MA), Swarm Robotics

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Request Permissions

Permissions PLS:

Request Permissions

Сopyright:

Citation:

References

[1] Herianto, T. Sakakibara and D. Kurabayashi: Journal of Bionic Engineering Vol. 4 Issue 4 (2007), pp.245-253.

Google Scholar

[2] C.R. Kube and H. Zhang. Adaptive Behavior Vol. 2 Issue 2 (1993), pp.189-219.

Google Scholar

[3] C.R. Kube and E. Bonabeau. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, Vol. 30 (2000), pp.85-101.

Google Scholar

[4] S. Kazadi, A. Abdul-Khaliq and R. Goodman. Robotics and Autonomous Sytems, Vol. 38 (2002), pp.93-117.

DOI: 10.1016/s0921-8890(01)00171-3

Google Scholar

[5] D. Zhang, G. Xie, J. Yu et al. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, Vol. 55 (2007), pp.572-588.

Google Scholar

[6] D. Payton, R. Estkowski and M. Howard. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, Vol. 44 (2003), pp.229-240.

DOI: 10.1016/s0921-8890(03)00073-3

Google Scholar

[7] N.R. Franks, J.W. Hooper, M. Gumn et al. Swarm Intelligence, Vol. 1 (2007), pp.81-94.

Google Scholar

[8] S. Nouyan, A. Campo and M. Dorigo. Swarm Intelligence, Vol. 2 (2008), pp.1-23.

Google Scholar

[9] Information on http: /www. processing. org.

Google Scholar