Consensus costs and conflict in robot swarms
Pages 1065 - 1068
Abstract
It is commonly observed that aggregation in nature provides significant benefits to the group members. However, to reach a consensus individual preferences are frequently lost. Conflict is generally avoided because of the negative influence it could have on the success of collective movements. However, it could be used to balance consensus costs with individual preferences. Using a biologically-based collective movement model, this work investigates the possibility of conflict in a group movement allowing for differing individual goals to be accomplished, while still maintaining group cohesion much of the time. Individuals focus on their own needs, which may include the protection of being a part of a group or the desire to move away from the group and towards its preferred destination. Results show that by allowing conflict in group decision-making, consensus costs were balanced with individual preferences in such a way that group level success still occurred, while significantly improving the success of differing goals.
References
[1]
L. Conradt and T. J. Roper. Conflicts of interest and the evolution of decision sharing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1518):807--819, 2009.
[2]
I. D. Couzin and J. Krause. Self-organization and collective behavior in vertebrates. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 32:1--75, 2003.
[3]
B. E. Eskridge. Effects of local communication and topology on collective movement initiation. In International Conference on the Simulation and Synthesis of Living Things, volume 13, pages 155--162, 2012.
[4]
J. Gautrais. The hidden variables of leadership. Behavioural Processes, 84(3):664--667, 2010.
[5]
C. Hemelrijk and H. Hildenbrandt. Self-organized shape and frontal density of fish schools. Ethology, 114(3):245--254, 2008.
[6]
M. Nagy, Z. Ákos, D. Biro, and T. Vicsek. Hierarchical group dynamics in pigeon flocks. Nature, 464(7290):890--893, 2010.
[7]
M. O'Neill and C. Ryan. Grammatical Evolution: Evolutionary Automatic Programming in an Arbitrary Language. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA, USA, 2003.
[8]
O. Petit and R. Bon. Decision-making processes: The case of collective movements. Behavioural Processes, 64(3):635--647, 2010.
[9]
O. Petit, J. Gautrais, J.-B. Leca, G. Theraulaz, and J.-L. Deneubourg. Collective decision-making in white-faced capuchin monkeys. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 276(1672):3495--3503, 2009.
[10]
M.-H. Pillot, J. Gautrais, P. Arrufat, I. D. Couzin, R. Bon, and J.-L. Deneubourg. Scalable rules for coherent group motion in a gregarious vertebrate. PLoS ONE, 6(1):e14487, 01 2011.
[11]
E. Şahin. Swarm robotics: From sources of inspiration to domains of application. In Swarm robotics, volume 3342 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 10--20. Springer, 2005.
[12]
C. Sueur and J. Deneubourg. Self-organization in primates: Understanding the rules underlying collective movements. International Journal of Primatology, 32(6):1413--1432, 2011.
[13]
C. Sueur and O. Petit. Shared or unshared consensus decision in macaques? Behavioural Processes, 78(1):84--92, 2008.
Index Terms
- Consensus costs and conflict in robot swarms
Recommendations
Consensus costs and conflict in a collective movement
GECCO '14: Proceedings of the 2014 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary ComputationAggregation, whether it be in natural or artificial systems, provides numerous benefits to both the individual and the group. However, aggregation has costs and frequently involves inter-individual conflict. Although conflicts in natural systems is ...
Effects of personality decay on collective movements
GECCO Comp '14: Proceedings of the Companion Publication of the 2014 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary ComputationIn natural systems, many animals organize into groups without a designated leader and still perform complex collective behaviors. Although individuals in the group may be considered equal, all the individuals differ in the traits each of them possess. ...
Adapting to a changing environment using winner and loser effects
GECCO '14: Proceedings of the 2014 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary ComputationMany animals form large aggregations that have no apparent consistent leader, yet are capable of highly coordinated movements. At any given time, it seems like an individual can emerge as a leader only to be replaced by another. Although individuals ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
July 2014
1524 pages
Copyright © 2014 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 12 July 2014
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Technical-note
Funding Sources
Conference
GECCO '14
Sponsor:
Acceptance Rates
GECCO Comp '14 Paper Acceptance Rate 180 of 544 submissions, 33%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 1,669 of 4,410 submissions, 38%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 63Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)1
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 03 Mar 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in