skip to main content
research-article

Property-Driven Design for Robot Swarms: A Design Method Based on Prescriptive Modeling and Model Checking

Published: 19 December 2014 Publication History

Abstract

In this article, we present property-driven design, a novel top-down design method for robot swarms based on prescriptive modeling and model checking. Traditionally, robot swarms have been developed using a code-and-fix approach: in a bottom-up iterative process, the developer tests and improves the individual behaviors of the robots until the desired collective behavior is obtained. The code-and-fix approach is unstructured, and the quality of the obtained swarm depends completely on the expertise and ingenuity of the developer who has little scientific or technical support in his activity. Property-driven design aims at providing such scientific and technical support, with many advantages compared to the traditional unstructured approach. Property-driven design is composed of four phases: first, the developer formally specifies the requirements of the robot swarm by stating its desired properties; second, the developer creates a prescriptive model of the swarm and uses model checking to verify that this prescriptive model satisfies the desired properties; third, using the prescriptive model as a blueprint, the developer implements a simulated version of the desired robot swarm and validates the prescriptive model developed in the previous step; fourth, the developer implements the desired robot swarm and validates the previous steps. We demonstrate property-driven design using two case studies: aggregation and foraging.

References

[1]
C. Baier and J.-P. Katoen. 2008. Principles of Model Checking. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
[2]
W. Banzhaf and N. Pillay. 2007. Why complex systems engineering needs biological development. Complexity 13, 2, 12--21.
[3]
K. Beck. 2003. Test-Driven Development: By Example. Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA.
[4]
S. Berman, A. Halasz, M. A. Hsieh, and V. Kumar. 2009. Optimized stochastic policies for task allocation in swarms of robots. IEEE Transactions on Robotics 25, 4, 927--937.
[5]
S. Berman, V. Kumar, and R. Nagpal. 2011. Design of control policies for spatially inhomogeneous robot swarms with application to commercial pollination. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA'11). 378--385.
[6]
R. H. Bordini. 2009. Multi-Agent Programming: Languages, Tools and Applications, Vol. 2. Springer, New York. NY.
[7]
M. Brambilla, M. Dorigo, and M. Birattari. 2014. Property-Driven Design for Robot Swarms A Design Method Based on Prescriptive Modeling and Model Checking. Supplementary material available at http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/supp/IridiaSupp2014-003/index.html.
[8]
M. Brambilla, E. Ferrante, M. Birattari, and M. Dorigo. 2013. Swarm robotics: A review from the swarm engineering perspective. Swarm Intelligence 7, 1, 1--41.
[9]
M. Brambilla, C. Pinciroli, M. Birattari, and M. Dorigo. 2012. Property-driven design for swarm robotics. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS'12). 139--146.
[10]
A. Brutschy. 2014. The TAM: A Device for Task Abstraction in Swarm Robotics Research. Technical Report TR/IRIDIA/2010-015.005. IRIDIA, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
[11]
F. Ciesinski and M. Größer. 2004. On probabilistic computation tree logic. In Validation of Stochastic Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2925. Springer, 333--355.
[12]
C. Dixon, A. Winfield, and M. Fisher. 2012. Towards temporal verification of swarm robotic systems. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 60, 11, 1429--1441.
[13]
M. Dorigo, M. Birattari, and M. Brambilla. 2014. Swarm robotics. Scholarpedia 9, 1, 1463.
[14]
G. Francesca, M. Brambilla, A. Brutschy, L. Garattoni, R. Miletitch, G. Podevijn, A. Reina, T. Soleymani, M. Salvaro, C. Pinciroli, V. Trianni, and M. Birattari. 2014a. An experiment in automatic design of robot swarms. In Swarm Intelligence. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 8667. Springer, 25--37.
[15]
G. Francesca, M. Brambilla, A. Brutschy, V. Trianni, and M. Birattari. 2014b. AutoMoDe: A novel approach to the automatic design of control software for robot swarms. Swarm Intelligence 8, 2, 89--112.
[16]
D. Goldberg and M. J. Matarić. 2001. Design and evaluation of robust behavior-based controllers for distributed multi-robot collection tasks. In Robot Teams: From Diversity to Polymorphism. A. K. Peters, Natick, MA, 315--344.
[17]
A. Gutiérrez, A. Campo, M. Dorigo, J. Donate, F. Monasterio-Huelin, and L. Magdalena. 2009. Open e-puck range & bearing miniaturized board for local communication in swarm robotics. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA'09). 3111--3116.
[18]
H. Hamann. 2013. Towards swarm calculus: Urn models of collective decisions and universal properties of swarm performance. Swarm Intelligence 7, 2--3, 145--172.
[19]
H. Hamann and H. Wörn. 2008. A framework of space--time continuous models for algorithm design in swarm robotics. Swarm Intelligence 2, 2, 209--239.
[20]
H. Hansson and B. Jonsson. 1994. A logic for reasoning about time and reliability. Formal Aspects of Computing 6, 5, 512--535.
[21]
R. Jeanson, C. Rivault, J.-L. Deneubourg, S. Blanco, R. Fournier, C. Jost, and G. Theraulaz. 2005. Self-organized aggregation in cockroaches. Animal Behaviour 69, 1, 169--180.
[22]
S. Kazadi, J. R. Lee, and J. Lee. 2009. Model independence in swarm robotics. International Journal of Intelligent Computing and Cybernetics: Special Issue on Swarm Robotics 2, 4, 672--694.
[23]
S. Konur, C. Dixon, and M. Fisher. 2012. Analysing robot swarm behaviour via probabilistic model checking. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 60, 2, 199--213.
[24]
M. Kwiatkowska, G. Norman, and D. Parker. 2004. Probabilistic symbolic model checking with PRISM: A hybrid approach. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer 6, 2, 128--142.
[25]
K. Lerman and A. Galstyan. 2002. Mathematical model of foraging in a group of robots: Effect of interference. Autonomous Robots 13, 2, 127--141.
[26]
K. Lerman, A. Martinoli, and A. Galstyan. 2005. A review of probabilistic macroscopic models for swarm robotic systems. In Swarm Robotics. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3342. Springer, 143--152.
[27]
M. Massink, M. Brambilla, D. Latella, M. Dorigo, and M. Birattari. 2013. On the use of Bio-PEPA for modelling and analysing collective behaviours in swarm robotics. Swarm Intelligence 7, 2--3, 201--228.
[28]
J. Miller and J. Mukerji. 2003. MDA Guide V1.0.1. Retrieved November 2, 2014, from http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?omg/03-06-01.
[29]
F. Mondada, M. Bonani, X. Raemy, J. Pugh, C. Cianci, A. Klaptocz, S. Magnenat, J.-C. Zufferey, D. Floreano, and A. Martinoli. 2009. The e-puck, a robot designed for education in engineering. In Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Autonomous Robot Systems and Competitions, Vol. 1. 59--65.
[30]
V. Nimal. 2010. Statistical Approaches for Probabilistic Model Checking. MSc Mini-Project Dissertation. Oxford University Computing Laboratory, Oxford, UK.
[31]
C. Pinciroli, V. Trianni, R. O'Grady, G. Pini, A. Brutschy, M. Brambilla, N. Mathews, E. Ferrante, G. Di Caro, F. Ducatelle, M. Birattari, L. M. Gambardella, and M. Dorigo. 2012. ARGoS: A modular, parallel, multi-engine simulator for multi-robot systems. Swarm Intelligence 6, 4, 271--295.
[32]
G. Pini, A. Brutschy, M. Birattari, and M. Dorigo. 2009. Interference reduction through task partitioning in a robotic swarm. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Informatics in Control, Automation, and Robotics (ICINCO'09). 52--59.
[33]
E. Şahin. 2005. Swarm robotics: From sources of inspiration to domains of application. In Swarm Robotics. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3342. Springer, 10--20.
[34]
R. F. Serfozo. 1979. An equivalence between continuous and discrete time Markov decision processes. Operations Research 27, 3, 616--620.
[35]
J. M. Smith. 1978. Models in Ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.
[36]
A. F. T. Winfield, J. Sa, M. C. Fernandez-Gago, C. Dixon, and M. Fisher. 2005. On formal specification of emergent behaviours in swarm robotic systems. International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems 2, 4, 363--370.
[37]
M. Wooldridge and N. R. Jennings. 1998. Pitfalls of agent-oriented development. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Autonomous Agents. 385--391.
[38]
F. Zambonelli, N. Jennings, and M. Wooldridge. 2001. Organisational abstractions for the analysis and design of multi-agent systems. In Agent-Oriented Software Engineering. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1957. Springer, 407--422.
[39]
D. Zarzhitsky, D. Spears, D. Thayer, and W. Spears. 2005. Agent-based chemical plume tracing using fluid dynamics. In Formal Approaches to Agent-Based Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3228. Springer, 146--160.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Designing self-organizing systems using surrogate models and the compromise decision support problem constructAdvanced Engineering Informatics10.1016/j.aei.2023.10235059(102350)Online publication date: Jan-2024
  • (2023)A Survey of Applications of Blockchain in Collective Decision-Making Scenarios in Swarm RoboticsJournal of Innovation Information Technology and Application (JINITA)10.35970/jinita.v5i2.19505:2(124-129)Online publication date: 29-Dec-2023
  • (2023)Recent trends in robot learning and evolution for swarm roboticsFrontiers in Robotics and AI10.3389/frobt.2023.113484110Online publication date: 24-Apr-2023
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems
ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems  Volume 9, Issue 4
January 2015
137 pages
ISSN:1556-4665
EISSN:1556-4703
DOI:10.1145/2695594
Issue’s Table of Contents
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]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 19 December 2014
Accepted: 01 September 2014
Revised: 01 September 2014
Received: 01 January 2014
Published in TAAS Volume 9, Issue 4

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Swarm robotics
  2. aggregation
  3. foraging
  4. model checking
  5. prescriptive modeling
  6. top-down design

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed

Funding Sources

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)22
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
Reflects downloads up to 27 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Designing self-organizing systems using surrogate models and the compromise decision support problem constructAdvanced Engineering Informatics10.1016/j.aei.2023.10235059(102350)Online publication date: Jan-2024
  • (2023)A Survey of Applications of Blockchain in Collective Decision-Making Scenarios in Swarm RoboticsJournal of Innovation Information Technology and Application (JINITA)10.35970/jinita.v5i2.19505:2(124-129)Online publication date: 29-Dec-2023
  • (2023)Recent trends in robot learning and evolution for swarm roboticsFrontiers in Robotics and AI10.3389/frobt.2023.113484110Online publication date: 24-Apr-2023
  • (2023)An integrated Design Methodology for Swarm Robotics using Model-Based Systems Engineering and Robot Operating SystemProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science10.1177/09544062231216853238:11(5159-5185)Online publication date: 24-Dec-2023
  • (2023)Fast Collective Decision-Making without Prior KnowledgeProceedings of the Companion Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation10.1145/3583133.3590623(123-126)Online publication date: 15-Jul-2023
  • (2023)Testing, Validation, and Verification of Robotic and Autonomous Systems: A Systematic ReviewACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology10.1145/354294532:2(1-61)Online publication date: 30-Mar-2023
  • (2023)Formal Modeling and Verification of Industrial Robotic Arm - A Case Study2023 IEEE 23rd International Conference on Software Quality, Reliability, and Security Companion (QRS-C)10.1109/QRS-C60940.2023.00106(499-508)Online publication date: 22-Oct-2023
  • (2022)Spatial microscopic modeling of collective movements in multi-robot systems: Design choices and calibrationFrontiers in Robotics and AI10.3389/frobt.2022.9610539Online publication date: 6-Oct-2022
  • (2022)Towards an integrated automatic design process for robot swarmsOpen Research Europe10.12688/openreseurope.14025.21(112)Online publication date: 4-Nov-2022
  • (2022)Decentralized Control of Minimalistic Robotic Swarms For Guaranteed Target Encapsulation2022 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)10.1109/IROS47612.2022.9981959(7251-7258)Online publication date: 23-Oct-2022
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Full Access

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media