On Decentralized Coordination for Spatial Task Allocation and Scheduling in Heterogeneous Teams
Pages 988 - 996
Abstract
In the context of coordination and planning in collaborative multi-robot/agent systems, we consider a general reference problem that includes tasks that are spatially localized and have an associated service time, and accounts for the use of a heterogeneous team, in which different robots may have a different performance on the same task. A mixed integer linear formulation is introduced and used to solve the problem model in a centralized iterative manner: in closed-loop, team-level plans are adaptively computed and sent out. Unfortunately, a centralized scheme can suffer from computational and communication shortcomings. Therefore, we introduce a top-down recipe for decentralization, aiming to balance the tradeoff among implementation costs, computational requirements, and quality of coordination. The decentralized architecture depends on various aspects that we study through an empirical sensitivity analysis. Results show that the impact and the relationships among the different aspects are far from being obvious or intuitive. A number of practical lessons are learned, that could apply to other similar problems and/or decentralized architectures derived in the same top-down modality.
References
[1]
M. Alighanbari and J. How. Decentralized Task Assignment for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. In IEEE Conf. on Decision and Control, pages 5668--5673, 2005.
[2]
C. Amato, G. Konidaris, G. Cruz, C. A. Maynor, J. P. How, and L. P. Kaelbling. Planning for decentralized control of multiple robots under uncertainty. In Proc. of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 1241--1248, 2015.
[3]
F. Amigoni, N. Basilico, and A. Quattrini Li. How Much Worth Is Coordination of Mobile Robots for Exploration in Search and Rescue? In RoboCup 2012: Robot Soccer World Cup XVI, volume 7500 LNAI, pages 106--117. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013.
[4]
M. Anderson and N. Papanikolopoulos. Implicit cooperation strategies for multi-robot search of unknown areas. Journal of Intelligent and Robotic Systems, 53(4):381--397, 2008.
[5]
M. Bernardine Dias, R. Zlot, N. Kalra, and A. Stentz. Market-based multirobot coordination: A survey and analysis. Proc. of the IEEE, 94(7):1257--1270, 2006.
[6]
N. Bezzo, B. Griffin, P. Cruz, J. Donahue, R. Fierro, and J. Wood. A Cooperative Heterogeneous Mobile Wireless Mechatronic System. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 19(1):20--31, 2014.
[7]
A. Brutschy, G. Pini, C. Pinciroli, M. Birattari, and M. Dorigo. Self-organized task allocation to sequentially interdependent tasks in swarm robotics. International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), 28(1):101--125, 2014.
[8]
L. Chen and E. Miller-Hooks. Optimal team deployment in urban search and rescue. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 46(8):984--999, 2012.
[9]
H. L. Choi, L. Brunet, and J. P. How. Consensus-based decentralized auctions for robust task allocation. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 25(4):912--926, 2009.
[10]
D. Claes, F. A. Oliehoek, K. Tuyls, and D. Hennes. Effective Approximations for Multi-Robot Coordination in Spatially Distributed Tasks. In International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), pages 881--890, 2015.
[11]
D. Di Paola, A. Gasparri, D. Naso, G. Ulivi, and F. L. Lewis. Decentralized task sequencing and multiple mission control for heterogeneous robotic networks. In IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pages 4467--4473. IEEE, 2011.
[12]
J. W. Durham, R. Carli, P. Frasca, and F. Bullo. Discrete partitioning and coverage control for gossiping robots. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 28(2):364--378, 2012.
[13]
E. Feo Flushing, L. M. Gambardella, and G. A. Di Caro. A mathematical programming approach to collaborative missions with heterogeneous teams. In Proc. of IEEE/RSJ International Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pages 396--403, 2014.
[14]
S. K. Gan, R. Fitch, and S. Sukkarieh. Online decentralized information gathering with spatial-temporal constraints. Autonomous Robots, 37(1):1--25, 2014.
[15]
B. P. Gerkey and M. J. Matarić. Sold!: Auction methods for multirobot coordination. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 18(5):758--768, 2002.
[16]
G. Ghiani, F. Guerriero, G. Laporte, and R. Musmanno. Real-time vehicle routing: Solution concepts, algorithms and parallel computing strategies. European Journal of Operational Research, 151(1):1--11, 2003.
[17]
G. A. Hollinger and S. Singh. Multirobot coordination with periodic connectivity: Theory and experiments. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 28(4):967--973, 2012.
[18]
E. Jones, B. Browning, M. Dias, B. Argall, M. Veloso, and A. Stentz. Dynamically formed heterogeneous robot teams performing tightly-coordinated tasks. In Proc. of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 570--575, 2006.
[19]
G. A. Korsah, A. Stentz, and M. B. Dias. A comprehensive taxonomy for multi-robot task allocation. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 32(12):1495--1512, 2013.
[20]
T. Lemaire, R. Alami, and S. Lacroix. A distributed tasks allocation scheme in multi-UAV context. Proc. of IEEE Int. Conf. on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 4:3622--3627, 2004.
[21]
L. Luo, N. Chakraborty, and K. Sycara. Multi-robot assignment algorithm for tasks with set precedence constraints. In IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pages 2526--2533, 2011.
[22]
J. Parker, E. Nunes, J. Godoy, and M. Gini. Exploiting spatial locality and heterogeneity of agents for search and rescue teamwork. Journal of Field Robotics, 7, 2015.
[23]
S. Ponda, J. Redding, Han-Lim Choi, J. P. How, M. Vavrina, and J. Vian. Decentralized planning for complex missions with dynamic communication constraints. In Proc. of American Control Conference, pages 3998--4003. IEEE, 2010.
[24]
S. S. Ponda, L. B. Johnson, A. N. Kopeikin, H.-L. Choi, and J. P. How. Distributed Planning Strategies to Ensure Network Connectivity for Dynamic Heterogeneous Teams. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 30(5):861--869, 2012.
[25]
S. Sariel-Talay, T. R. Balch, and N. Erdogan. A generic framework for distributed multirobot cooperation. Journal of Intelligent and Robotic Systems, 63(2):323--358, 2011.
[26]
P. M. Shiroma and M. F. M. Campos. CoMutaR: A framework for multi-robot coordination and task allocation. In Proc. of IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pages 4817--4824, 2009.
[27]
P. Vansteenwegen, W. Souffriau, and D. V. Oudheusden. The orienteering problem: A survey. European Journal of Operational Research, 209(1):1--10, 2011.
[28]
L. Vig and J. A. Adams. Market-Based Multi-robot Coalition Formation. In Distributed Autonomous Robotic Systems 7, pages 227--236. Springer, 2006.
[29]
F. Wu, S. Zilberstein, and X. Chen. Online planning for multi-agent systems with bounded communication. Artificial Intelligence, 175(2):487--511, 2011.
[30]
Y. Zhang and L. E. Parker. IQ-ASyMTRe: Forming Executable Coalitions for Tightly Coupled Multirobot Tasks. IEEE Trans. on Robotics, 29(2):400--416, 2013.
[31]
Y. Zhang, L. E. Parker, and S. Kambhampati. Coalition coordination for tightly coupled multirobot tasks with sensor constraints. In Proc. of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 1090--1097, 2014.
Index Terms
- On Decentralized Coordination for Spatial Task Allocation and Scheduling in Heterogeneous Teams
Recommendations
Improving the performance of standard solvers for quadratic 0-1 programs by a tight convex reformulation: The QCR method
Let (QP) be a 0-1 quadratic program which consists in minimizing a quadratic function subject to linear equality constraints. In this paper, we present QCR, a general method to reformulate (QP) into an equivalent 0-1 program with a convex quadratic ...
Effective Task Allocation for Evolving Multi-robot Teams in Dangerous Environments
WI-IAT '13: Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Joint Conferences on Web Intelligence (WI) and Intelligent Agent Technologies (IAT) - Volume 02This paper describes the task management elements of a framework for coordinating a changing collection of heterogeneous robots operating in complex and dynamic environments such as disaster zones. Our framework allows a team to discover and distribute ...
How social cues shape task coordination and communication
CSCW '14: Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computingTo design computer-supported collaborative work (CSCW) systems that effectively support remote collaboration, designers need a better understanding of how people collaborate face-to-face and the mechanisms that they use to coordinate their actions. ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
May 2016
1580 pages
ISBN:9781450342391
- General Chairs:
- Catholijn M. Jonker,
- Stacy Marsella,
- Program Chairs:
- John Thangarajah,
- Karl Tuyls
Sponsors
- IFAAMAS
In-Cooperation
Publisher
International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems
Richland, SC
Publication History
Published: 09 May 2016
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Funding Sources
- Swiss National Science Foundation
Conference
AAMAS '16
Sponsor:
AAMAS '16: International Conference on Agents and Multiagent Systems
May 9 - 13, 2016
Singapore, Singapore
Acceptance Rates
AAMAS '16 Paper Acceptance Rate 137 of 550 submissions, 25%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 1,155 of 5,036 submissions, 23%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 178Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)1
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 18 Feb 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