skip to main content
research-article

Communication-Topology-preserving Motion Planning: Enabling Static Routing in UAV Networks

Published:07 December 2023Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) swarm offers extended coverage and is a vital solution for many applications. A key issue in UAV swarm control is to cover all targets while maintaining connectivity among UAVs, referred to as a multi-target coverage problem. With existing dynamic routing protocols, the flying ad hoc network suffers outdated and incorrect route information due to frequent topology changes. This might lead to failures of time-critical tasks. One mitigation solution is to keep the physical topology unchanged, thus maintaining a fixed communication topology and enabling static routing. However, keeping physical topology unchanged may sacrifice the coverage. In this article, we propose to maintain a fixed communication topology among UAVs, which allows certain changes in physical topology, so that to maximize the coverage. We develop a distributed motion planning algorithm for the online multi-target coverage problem with the constraint of keeping communication topology intact. As the communication topology needs to be timely updated when UAVs leave or arrive at the swarm, we further design a topology-management protocol. Experimental results from the ns-3 simulator show that under our algorithms, UAV swarms of different sizes achieve significantly improved delay and loss ratio, efficient coverage, and rapid topology update.

REFERENCES

  1. [1] Alam Muhammad Morshed and Moh Sangman. 2022. Joint topology control and routing in a UAV swarm for crowd surveillance. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 204 (2022), 103427. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1084804522000844Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. [2] Alotaibi Ebtehal Turki, Alqefari Shahad Saleh, and Koubaa Anis. 2019. LSAR: Multi-UAV collaboration for search and rescue missions. IEEE Access 7 (2019), 5581755832.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. [3] Awerbuch Baruch. 1987. Optimal distributed algorithms for minimum weight spanning tree, counting, leader election, and related problems. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. 230240.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. [4] Cabreira Tauã M., Brisolara Lisane B., and Jr Paulo R. Ferreira. 2019. Survey on coverage path planning with unmanned aerial vehicles. Drones 3, 1 (2019), 4.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. [5] Caillouet Christelle, Giroire Frédéric, and Razafindralambo Tahiry. 2018. Optimization of mobile sensor coverage with UAVs. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Communications Workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS’18). IEEE, 622627.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. [6] Charrier Tristan, Queffelec Arthur, Sankur Ocan, and Schwarzentruber François. 2019. Reachability and coverage planning for connected agents. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems. International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 18741876.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. [7] Chen Ziyan, Cheng Nan, Yin Zhisheng, He Jingchao, and Lu Ning. 2022. Service-oriented topology reconfiguration of UAV networks with deep reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Wireless Communications and Signal Processing (WCSP’22). IEEE, 753758.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. [8] Clausen Thomas, Jacquet Philippe, Adjih Cédric, Laouiti Anis, Minet Pascale, Muhlethaler Paul, Qayyum Amir, and Viennot Laurent. 2003. Optimized link state routing protocol (OLSR), Technical Report. IETF. 75 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. [9] Dai Chen, Zhu Kun, and Hossain Ekram. 2022. Multi-agent deep reinforcement learning for joint decoupled user association and trajectory design in full-duplex multi-UAV networks. IEEE Trans. Mobile Comput. (2022).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. [10] Silva Tulio Dapper e, Melo Carlos F. Emygdio de, Cumino Pedro, Rosario Denis, Cerqueira Eduardo, and Freitas Edison Pignaton De. 2019. STFANET: SDN-based topology management for flying ad hoc network. IEEE Access 7 (2019), 173499173514.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. [11] Erdelj Milan, Razafindralambo Tahiry, and Simplot-Ryl David. 2012. Covering points of interest with mobile sensors. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 24, 1 (2012), 3243.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. [12] Erdelj Milan, Saif Osamah, Natalizio Enrico, and Fantoni Isabelle. 2019. UAVs that fly forever: Uninterrupted structural inspection through automatic UAV replacement. Ad Hoc Netw. 94 (2019), 101612.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. [13] Falcon Jose, Mehrubeoglu Mehrube, and Rangel Pablo. 2022. Real-time image processing in a multi-UAV system for structural surveillance through IoT platform. In Real-Time Image Processing and Deep Learning 2022, Vol. 12102. SPIE, 139151.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. [14] Fernando Malintha, Senanayake Ransalu, and Swany Martin. 2022. CoCo games: Graphical game-theoretic swarm control for communication-aware coverage. IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 7, 3 (2022), 59665973.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. [15] Ham Andy, Similien Delchyne, Baek Stanley, and York George. 2022. Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs): Persistent surveillance for a military scenario. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems (ICUAS’22). IEEE, 14111417.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. [16] Hartuv Erez, Agmon Noa, and Kraus Sarit. 2018. Scheduling spare drones for persistent task performance under energy constraints. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems. 532540.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. [17] Hong Ji, Gao Zhi, Mei Tiancan, Li Yifan, and Zhao Chunyang. 2019. UAV-based traffic flow estimation and analysis. In Proceedings of the IEEE 15th International Conference on Control and Automation (ICCA’19). IEEE, 812817.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. [18] Joshi Abhishek, Dhongdi Sarang, Dharmadhikari Mihir, Mehta Ojit, and Anupama K. R.. 2022. Enclosing and monitoring of disaster area boundary using multi-UAV network. J. Ambient Intell. Human. Comput. (2022), 119.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. [19] Kantaros Yiannis and Zavlanos Michael M.. 2016. Distributed communication-aware coverage control by mobile sensor networks. Automatica 63 (2016), 209220.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. [20] Khan Adil, Zhang Jinling, Ahmad Shabeer, Memon Saifullah, Qureshi Haroon Akhtar, and Ishfaq Muhammad. 2022. Dynamic positioning and energy-efficient path planning for disaster scenarios in 5G-Assisted multi-UAV environments. Electronics 11, 14 (2022), 2197.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. [21] Karthik Soma, Koresh Khateri, Mahdi Pourgholi, Mohsen Montazeri, Lorenzo Sabattini, and Giovanni Beltrame. 2023. A complete set of connectivity-aware local topology manipulation operations for robot swarms. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 5522–5529. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. [22] Kim Do-Yup and Lee Jang-Won. 2019. Joint mission assignment and topology management in the mission-critical FANET. IEEE IoT J. 7, 3 (2019), 23682385.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. [23] Kim Junguk L. and Belford Geneva G.. 1996. A distributed election protocol for unreliable networks. J. Parallel Distrib. Comput. 35, 1 (1996), 3542.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. [24] Lakew Demeke Shumeye, Sa’ad Umar, Dao Nhu-Ngoc, Na Woongsoo, and Cho Sungrae. 2020. Routing in flying ad hoc networks: A comprehensive survey. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 22, 2 (2020), 10711120.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. [25] Liao Zhuofan, Wang Jianxin, Zhang Shigeng, Cao Jiannong, and Min Geyong. 2014. Minimizing movement for target coverage and network connectivity in mobile sensor networks. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 26, 7 (2014), 19711983.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. [26] Licea Daniel Bonilla, Bonilla Moises, Ghogho Mounir, Lasaulce Samson, and Varma Vineeth S.. 2019. Communication-aware energy efficient trajectory planning with limited channel knowledge. IEEE Trans. Robot. 36, 2 (2019), 431442.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. [27] Liu Chao and Zhang Zhongshan. 2022. Towards a robust FANET: Distributed node importance estimation-based connectivity maintenance for UAV swarms. Ad Hoc Netw. 125 (2022), 102734.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. [28] Liu Chao, Zhang Zhongshan, and Zeng Qian. 2021. Distributed connectivity maintenance for Flying Ad-hoc Networks considering bridging links. Phys. Commun. 48 (2021), 101409.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. [29] Liu Zhiyu, Wu Bo, Dai Jin, and Lin Hai. 2020. Distributed communication-aware motion planning for networked mobile robots under formal specifications. IEEE Trans. Contr. Netw. Syst. 7, 4 (2020), 18011811.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. [30] Luo Ruyu, Tian Hui, and Ni Wanli. 2021. Communication-aware path design for indoor robots exploiting federated deep reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the IEEE 32nd Annual International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC’21). IEEE, 11971202.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. [31] Maheshwari Aastha and Chand Narottam. 2019. A survey on wireless sensor networks coverage problems. In Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Communication, Computing and Networking. Springer, 153164.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. [32] Meera Ajith Anil, Popović Marija, Millane Alexander, and Siegwart Roland. 2019. Obstacle-aware adaptive informative path planning for uav-based target search. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA’19). IEEE, 718724.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. [33] Megiddo Nimrod. 1990. On the complexity of some geometric problems in unbounded dimension. J. Symbol. Comput. 10, 3-4 (1990), 327334.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. [34] Mohsan Syed Agha Hassnain, Khan Muhammad Asghar, Noor Fazal, Ullah Insaf, and Alsharif Mohammed H.. 2022. Towards the unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs): A comprehensive review. Drones 6, 6 (2022), 147.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. [35] Muralidharan Arjun and Mostofi Yasamin. 2021. Communication-aware robotics: Exploiting motion for communication. Annu. Rev. Contr. Robot. Auton. Syst. 4, 1 (2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. [36] Nematzadeh Sajjad, Torkamanian-Afshar Mahsa, Seyyedabbasi Amir, and Kiani Farzad. 2022. Maximizing coverage and maintaining connectivity in WSN and decentralized IoT: An efficient metaheuristic-based method for environment-aware node deployment. Neural Comput. Appl. (2022), 131.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. [37] Nguyen Tu N., Liu Bing-Hong, and Wang Shih-Yuan. 2019. On new approaches of maximum weighted target coverage and sensor connectivity: Hardness and approximation. IEEE Trans. Netw. Sci. Eng. 7, 3 (2019), 17361751.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. [38] Panerati Jacopo, Gianoli Luca, Pinciroli Carlo, Shabah Abdo, Nicolescu Gabriela, and Beltrame Giovanni. 2018. From swarms to stars: Task coverage in robot swarms with connectivity constraints. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA’18). IEEE, 76747681.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. [39] Pasandideh Faezeh, Silva Tulio Dapper e, Silva Antonio Arlis Santos da, and Freitas Edison Pignaton de. 2022. Topology management for flying ad hoc networks based on particle swarm optimization and software-defined networking. Wireless Netw. (2022), 116.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. [40] Pei Guangyu and Henderson Tom. 2009. Validation of ns-3 802.11 b PHY model. Retrieved from http://www.nsnam.org/~pei/80211b.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. [41] Perkins Charles, Belding-Royer Elizabeth, and Das Samir. 2003. RFC3561: Ad hoc on-demand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing, Technical Report. IETF. 35 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. [42] Piacentini Chiara, Bernardini Sara, and Beck J Christopher. 2019. Autonomous target search with multiple coordinated UAVs. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 65 (2019), 519568.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. [43] Queffelec Arthur. 2021. Connected Multi-agent Path Finding: How Robots Get Wway with Texting and Driving. Ph. D. Dissertation. Université Rennes 1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. [44] Rahmanpour Shirin and Esfanjani Reza Mahboobi. 2018. Planning of communication and motion strategies for networked mobile robots. In Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Robotics and 2nd Asia-Pacific International Symposium. IEEE, 4653.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. [45] Rahmanpour Shirin and Esfanjani Reza Mahboobi. 2019. Energy-aware planning of motion and communication strategies for networked mobile robots. Inf. Sci. 497 (2019), 149164.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. [46] Riley George F. and Henderson Thomas R.. 2010. The ns-3 network simulator. In Modeling and Tools for Network Simulation. Springer, 1534.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. [47] Rovira-Sugranes Arnau, Razi Abolfazl, Afghah Fatemeh, and Chakareski Jacob. 2022. A review of AI-enabled routing protocols for UAV networks: Trends, challenges, and future outlook. Ad Hoc Netw. 130 (2022), 102790.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. [48] Safavat Sunitha and Rawat Danda B.. 2022. OptiML: An enhanced ML approach towards design of SDN based UAV networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Communications. IEEE, 16.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. [49] Santra Shreya, Paet Leonard B., Laine Mickael, Yoshida Kazuya, and Staudinger Emanuel. 2021. Experimental validation of deterministic radio propagation model developed for communication-aware path planning. In Proceedings of the IEEE 17th International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE’21). IEEE, 12411246.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. [50] Shang Zhexiong and Shen Zhigang. 2022. Flight planning for survey-grade 3D reconstruction of truss bridges. Remote Sens. 14, 13 (2022), 3200.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. [51] Shetty Akshay, Hussain Timmy, and Gao Grace. 2021. Decentralized connectivity maintenance for multi-robot systems under motion and sensing uncertainties. In Proceedings of the 34th International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of the Institute of Navigation (ION GNSS+’21). 24452458.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  52. [52] Siligardi Luca, Panerati Jacopo, Kaufmann Marcel, Minelli Marco, Ghedini Cinara, Beltrame Giovanni, and Sabattini Lorenzo. 2019. Robust area coverage with connectivity maintenance. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA’19). IEEE, 22022208.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. [53] Sudhakar S., Vijayakumar V., Kumar C. Sathiya, Priya V., Ravi Logesh, and Subramaniyaswamy V.. 2020. Unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) based forest fire detection and monitoring for reducing false alarms in forest-fires. Comput. Commun. 149 (2020), 116.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. [54] Tian Wen, Jiao Zhenzhen, Liu Min, Zhang Meng, and Li Dong. 2019. Cooperative communication based connectivity recovery for UAV networks. In Proceedings of the ACM Turing Celebration Conference-China. 15.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. [55] Wang Jiaxing, Bai Lin, Chen Jianrui, and Wang Jingjing. 2023. Starling flocks-inspired resource allocation for ISAC-aided green Ad Hoc networks. IEEE Trans. Green Commun. Netw. 7, 1 (2023), 444454.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  56. [56] Wenxing Liao, Muqing Wu, Min Zhao, Peizhe Li, and Tianze Li. 2017. Hop count limitation analysis in wireless multi-hop networks. Int. J. Distrib. Sens. Netw. 13, 1 (2017), 1550147716683606.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  57. [57] Wu Shiguang, Pu Zhiqiang, Qiu Tenghai, Yi Jianqiang, and Zhang Tianle. 2022. Deep reinforcement learning based multi-target coverage with connectivity guaranteed. IEEE Trans. Industr. Inf. (2022).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. [58] Xia Zhaoyue, Du Jun, Wang Jingjing, Jiang Chunxiao, Ren Yong, Li Gang, and Han Zhu. 2021. Multi-agent reinforcement learning aided intelligent UAV swarm for target tracking. IEEE Trans. Vehic. Technol. 71, 1 (2021), 931945.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. [59] Xu Hao, Liu Peize, Chen Xinyi, and Shen Shaojie. 2022. \(D^2\)SLAM: Decentralized and distributed collaborative visual-inertial SLAM system for aerial swarm. arXiv:2211.01538. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.01538Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. [60] Xu Xianghua, Dai Zhixiang, Shan Anxing, and Gu Tao. 2019. Connected target \(\epsilon\)-probability coverage in WSNs with directional probabilistic sensors. IEEE Syst. J. (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. [61] Xu Xiaoling, Yang Lixin, Meng Wei, Cai Qianqian, and Fu Minyue. 2019. Multi-agent coverage search in unknown environments with obstacles: A survey. In Proceedings of the Chinese Control Conference (CCC’19). IEEE, 23172322.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. [62] Yanmaz Evşen. 2022. Positioning aerial relays to maintain connectivity during drone team missions. Ad Hoc Netw. 128 (2022), 102800.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. [63] Yu Jiguo, Chen Ying, Ma Liran, Huang Baogui, and Cheng Xiuzhen. 2016. On connected target k-coverage in heterogeneous wireless sensor networks. Sensors 16, 1 (2016), 104.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  64. [64] Yun Won Joon, Park Soohyun, Kim Joongheon, Shin MyungJae, Jung Soyi, Mohaisen David A., and Kim Jae-Hyun. 2022. Cooperative multiagent deep reinforcement learning for reliable surveillance via autonomous multi-UAV control. IEEE Trans. Industr. Inf. 18, 10 (2022), 70867096.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  65. [65] Zhang Fan and Yang Gangqiang. 2020. A stable backup routing protocol for wireless Ad Hoc networks. Sensors 20, 23 (2020), 6743.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  66. [66] Zhang Ruilong, Zong Qun, Zhang Xiuyun, Dou Liqian, and Tian Bailing. 2022. Game of drones: Multi-UAV pursuit-evasion game with online motion planning by deep reinforcement learning. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst. (2022).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. [67] Zhang Xin Ming, Zhang Yue, Yan Fan, and Vasilakos Athanasios V.. 2014. Interference-based topology control algorithm for delay-constrained mobile ad hoc networks. IEEE Trans. Mobile Comput. 14, 4 (2014), 742754.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  68. [68] Zhang Zixuan, Zhang Bo, and Wu Yunlong. 2022. Joint communication–motion planning in networked robotic systems. Appl. Sci. 12, 12 (2022), 6261.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Communication-Topology-preserving Motion Planning: Enabling Static Routing in UAV Networks

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image ACM Transactions on Sensor Networks
          ACM Transactions on Sensor Networks  Volume 20, Issue 1
          January 2024
          717 pages
          ISSN:1550-4859
          EISSN:1550-4867
          DOI:10.1145/3618078
          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 the author(s) 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: 7 December 2023
          • Online AM: 7 November 2023
          • Accepted: 14 October 2023
          • Revised: 9 July 2023
          • Received: 17 December 2022
          Published in tosn Volume 20, Issue 1

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
        • Article Metrics

          • Downloads (Last 12 months)241
          • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)54

          Other Metrics

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        Full Text

        View this article in Full Text.

        View Full Text